Post by: Miss Piggy on August 11, 2017, 02:29:03 PM
fat-shaming
body-shaming
pretty-much-anything-shaming
body positive (with or without hyphen)
birther (in the context of where Obama was born)
I'll think of more later.
Add yours below...
Post by: Cowardly Toaster on August 11, 2017, 02:36:09 PM
Post by: Travis on August 11, 2017, 02:50:37 PM
Hash tags of any sort. They were created as a reference point for organizing similar Twitter statements, but now they've evolved into shorthand statements by themselves on all kinds of media.
Post by: A Definite Beta Guy on August 11, 2017, 02:54:44 PM
Most terms probably fall in this category.
I really don't like that clapping emoji people put between words in their Tweets or Facebooks. I hate emoji talk in general, but that specifically grinds my gears. :)
Post by: Miss Piggy on August 11, 2017, 02:56:51 PM
Post by: Travis on August 11, 2017, 04:42:58 PM
I really, really hate headlines that start "People are [doing x]!" If you're writing about a person, give me their name, and if you're writing about a trend, please describe the trend rather than "people's" reaction to it. I'm reading an article, not a text message from a gossip-happy friend.
I'm also real tired of the phrase "fake news."
In the vein of clickbat titles, Facebook posts where the post is the headline. Inside that is the embedded article with the headline. And below that is what should be a summary of the article, but is in fact the headline repeated again! And rarely do these redundant headlines actually tell you what the article will be about. I realize that is the very definition of "click bait" in that they're enticing you to read the article to see what it is even about, but now it just turns me off instead.
Post by: Cowardly Toaster on August 11, 2017, 04:49:00 PM
I really, really hate headlines that start "People are [doing x]!" If you're writing about a person, give me their name, and if you're writing about a trend, please describe the trend rather than "people's" reaction to it. I'm reading an article, not a text message from a gossip-happy friend.
I'm also real tired of the phrase "fake news."
In the vein of clickbat titles, Facebook posts where the post is the headline. Inside that is the embedded article with the headline. And below that is what should be a summary of the article, but is in fact the headline repeated again! And rarely do these redundant headlines actually tell you what the article will be about. I realize that is the very definition of "click bait" in that they're enticing you to read the article to see what it is even about, but now it just turns me off instead.
The real MVPs are the ones who go read the clickbait and then comment the big reveal
Post by: ncornilsen on August 11, 2017, 05:27:59 PM
that is all.
Post by: bobechs on August 11, 2017, 05:35:04 PM
Right here on this site is where it flourishes, folks.
Try to do better.
Post by: Morning Glory on August 11, 2017, 05:41:44 PM
Utilize- most of the time "use" will do just fine
"Dialogue " as a verb
Most nouns that are pressed into usage as verbs when a perfectly good verb already exists
"Thru"
"Dilatate" - I know it is actually correct but "dilate" just sounds so much better
Post by: Alf91 on August 11, 2017, 05:42:41 PM
Post by: GenXbiker on August 11, 2017, 05:54:06 PM
"millennials"
Post by: T-Money$ on August 11, 2017, 06:17:59 PM
Underrepresented
Marginalized
Narrative
I trust nobody who uses such language...
Post by: Adventine on August 11, 2017, 06:32:38 PM
AF (as fuck)
On fleek
Squad
Girlboss
Post by: RangerOne on August 11, 2017, 06:36:41 PM
snowflake
fake news
cuck
brain washed
I generally don't like terms used to shut down conversation by pigeon holing the person you are talking to.
Post by: Laura33 on August 11, 2017, 06:55:35 PM
"Literally" to mean "figuratively."
Post by: Vertical Mode on August 11, 2017, 07:14:21 PM
-turnt
-bae
-fleek (where the fuck did this even come from?)
Post by: Dee on August 11, 2017, 07:48:03 PM
My spouse hates "game changer" and I don't blame him.
Post by: marty998 on August 11, 2017, 11:51:00 PM
"Winning at life." Ugh.
My spouse hates "game changer" and I don't blame him.
I hate game changers that going forward will put you ahead of the curve before you go whoa whoa whoa lets take a step back and think differently.
Post by: calimom on August 12, 2017, 12:03:46 AM
* bucket list
* reach out
* circle back
Post by: GuitarStv on August 12, 2017, 02:37:47 AM
"Winning at life." Ugh.
My spouse hates "game changer" and I don't blame him.
I hate game changers that going forward will put you ahead of the curve before you go whoa whoa whoa lets take a step back and think differently.
Going forward, outside the box thinking needs the leverage and bandwidth to proactively reprioritize better aligning with modern paradigms. Game changing stakeholder synergy is the way to get the ball rolling to circle back and take ownership of value added low hanging fruit.
I wish that life had chosen to make me less fluent in corporate management-speak.
Post by: Kris on August 12, 2017, 07:09:28 AM
Because 99% of the time, people are using it wrongly, in place of "uninterested." Eg: "Donald Trump is disinterested in learning about how to effectively do his job."
Post by: Financial.Velociraptor on August 12, 2017, 09:42:45 AM
- Bro-dawg
Post by: wenchsenior on August 12, 2017, 11:18:45 AM
Trigger/trigger warning
Post by: FINate on August 12, 2017, 11:25:00 AM
Post by: Paul der Krake on August 12, 2017, 11:38:02 AM
NO. THINK ABOUT IT.
Also, don't put apostrophes for the plural form on acronyms. Tell me about your IRAs, not your IRA's.
Post by: dandarc on August 12, 2017, 11:48:48 AM
"Literally" to mean "figuratively."That one's literally in the dictionary now, which literally makes my eyes bleed.
Post by: Stache-O-Lantern on August 12, 2017, 12:21:26 PM
Also I think it's dumb in news articles when they call where people live "(place)-based". As if most people were international jet-setters that keep an apartment somewhere but don't really live anywhere. At least that's how I read it in my mind. No matter how small the town, articles will say "(place)-based". I saw one today that referred to a "Shelburne-based woman". Shelburne is a town of about 7,000. Seems silly, and to me a subtle promotion of lifestyle inflation.
Post by: Paul der Krake on August 12, 2017, 12:23:23 PM
No. Apostrophes are for possessives and contractions. The only exception is for the plural of single letters. "Dot your i's and cross your t's.Also, don't put apostrophes for the plural form on acronyms. Tell me about your IRAs, not your IRA's.
I was taught this was the correct way to pluralize acronyms...
Post by: wenchsenior on August 12, 2017, 12:37:27 PM
Also, don't put apostrophes for the plural form on acronyms. Tell me about your IRAs, not your IRA's.
I was taught this was the correct way to pluralize acronyms...
Not unless the IRA is in possession of something.
Post by: gggggg on August 12, 2017, 04:04:40 PM
Post by: purple monkey on August 12, 2017, 07:27:05 PM
Post by: GenXbiker on August 12, 2017, 08:02:19 PM
"I could care less"
NO. THINK ABOUT IT.
I know, right?
Post by: gerardc on August 12, 2017, 08:06:21 PM
Starting or ending a statement on the internet with "FACT!" as if doing that somehow vacates therealityfact that your rant is still full of shit and most likely has no facts in it.
And replacing the word "fact" with "reality" is better how?
"Literally" to mean "figuratively."
That's true but you have to understand that all superlatives are eventually abused, e.g. "really" now means very/much in many situations, "epic" is getting abused too, etc. Language evolves with time.
Post by: Travis on August 12, 2017, 10:23:01 PM
Starting or ending a statement on the internet with "FACT!" as if doing that somehow vacates therealityfact that your rant is still full of shit and most likely has no facts in it.
And replacing the word "fact" with "reality" is better how?
I don't like using the same word twice in a sentence, especially when it just begs to be punned. Also, I chose "reality" because most of my encounters with the FACT! users tend to be conspiracy nutters whose sense of reality is certainly debatable.
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on August 13, 2017, 01:35:06 AM
Some of my husband's friends use it as a noun rather than a verb.
"I have to work this weekend; it's such a punish."
*rolls eyes*
Also, "I'm not like other girls", "I don't have female friends, too much drama", or any variation thereof.
I find those who complain about drama tend to be those perpetuating it.
Post by: gooki on August 13, 2017, 03:05:11 AM
Post by: Dicey on August 13, 2017, 04:57:45 AM
Using principal and principle as one and the same word.I remember this one from grade school. "The principal is your pal."
Right here on this site is where it flourishes, folks.
Try to do better.
(Pro tip: It may or not be true, but my pleated-plaid-uniform-wearing, Catholic School self did not know this then. It works.)
Post by: Dicey on August 13, 2017, 05:14:04 AM
"It's about time
It's about space
About two men in the strangest place"
The funny thing about that is that we all used to sing it as:
"It's about time
It's about space
It's about time to slap your face"
Maybe my brain is smarter (and funnier) than I give it credit for.
Here's a link for you, but don't say I didn't warn you. It's pure drivel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1G-TsdNWGg
Post by: Neal300 on August 13, 2017, 07:08:05 AM
Body-shaming
Post by: wenchsenior on August 13, 2017, 08:39:54 AM
Update: the NYT style guide says:QuoteUse apostrophes for plurals of abbreviations that have capital letters and periods: M.D.'s, C.P.A.'s. Also use apostrophes for plurals formed from single letters: He received A's and B's on his report card. Mind your p's and q's.
But do not use apostrophe's for plurals of abbreviations without periods, or for plurals formed from figures: TVs, PCs, DVDs; 1990s, 747s, size 7s.
So it depends, but "IRA's" is indeed incorrect. Now I know.
More thoughts on topic: I HATE "on accident," and I wish people would stop talking about "toxins" in food as opposed to in snake bites.
Apostrophes are a pain in the butt to learn, no doubt. DH still struggles with them, and he's written for decades. I really should just give him a short cheat sheet to tape to his computer monitor.
Post by: Travis on August 13, 2017, 11:17:26 AM
I have no problem with the phrases themselves, but they're used so much by people who don't understand they're meant to convene BREVITY. You don't use either of them after speaking or writing a paragraph of information.
Post by: Vertical Mode on August 13, 2017, 09:17:08 PM
-turnt
-bae
-fleek (where the fuck did this even come from?)
I think all three of those are slang from African American Vernacular English that have entered common usage. A lot of "new" phrases come from AAVE that way. (I think "on fleek" can be traced to one particular vine video, actually.)
Personally, I'm usually more frustrated by poor usage of words than by the invention of new ones. Slang will come and go, but ambiguous and misleading grammar... that's forever.
Well, that at least explains why I don't understand 'on fleek', then - don't use Vine, not planning to.
With respect to using and/or pioneering new words...I guess I will never be Shakespeare, lol.
Post by: lost_in_the_endless_aisle on August 13, 2017, 09:32:06 PM
saying "utilize" when saying "use" will do (more syllables != sounding smart)
"whopping"
Post by: Dicey on August 14, 2017, 01:36:54 AM
"traveling at a high rate of speed" to mean "fast"Oh, good ones! Ditto for using "simplistic" instead of "simple". Argh!
saying "utilize" when saying "use" will do (more syllables != sounding smart)
"whopping"
Post by: kei te pai on August 14, 2017, 01:52:14 AM
Post by: stackorstarve on August 14, 2017, 05:51:59 AM
Also any term used without elaboration to dismiss an argument.
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
Post by: Leisured on August 14, 2017, 07:23:52 AM
disinterested uninterested. Unless the person is being disinterested, that is unbiased. Thanks Kris
at this point in time now Thanks Dicey
ramp up rise
spiral up (or down) rise (or fall)
decimate reduce Decimate literally means reduce by one tenth. From Latin.
iconic perhaps characteristic. Thanks Stache
utilize use Thanks Lost
simplistic simple Thanks Dicey
marginal slight
marginally slightly
significant higher or lower Significant has a meaning in statistics, so if A is different from B by more than 5%, this difference is seen, usually, as a significant difference.
baby bump is OK, being descriptive. In Australia we sometimes use ‘preggers’ Take your choice.
Strunk and White Elements of Style has an excellent spoof of bureaucratic language by George Orwell, who wondered what the superb passage from Ecclesiastes 3:1-9 would look like if translated into bureaucratic language. ‘There is a time for everything’, written about 1200 BC. Immortal language translated into nonsense, and worth the price of the book by itself, but the Kindle edition is free.
Post by: GuitarStv on August 14, 2017, 07:34:37 AM
decimate reduce Decimate literally means reduce by one tenth. From Latin.
Decimate refers to the Roman military practice of punishing a group of soldiers by killing one in every ten of them (typically selected by lots). If we're going to get picky and only use ancient definitions for things it would be incorrect to define decimate as 'reduction by one tenth', that loses the original meaning almost entirely.
Post by: Davnasty on August 14, 2017, 07:49:11 AM
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!"Literally" to mean "figuratively."That one's literally in the dictionary now, which literally makes my eyes bleed.
Post by: Laura33 on August 14, 2017, 08:40:19 AM
"Literally" to mean "figuratively."
That's true but you have to understand that all superlatives are eventually abused, e.g. "really" now means very/much in many situations, "epic" is getting abused too, etc. Language evolves with time.
Well of course it does, or I'd have included my diatribe about "hopefully" (now used as "I hope" instead of as "in a hopeful manner," e.g., "hopefully, I'll win the Powerball," instead of "she walked hopefully to buy a lottery ticket"), or "impact" as a verb in sentences not involving meteorites or wisdom teeth. And none of the "new" phrases people have mentioned here bug me much, other than when they are overused (my DD now uses "yeet" as an all-purpose word -- I thought it was just an exclamation, but, no, now it's "man, she really yeeted that turn!" and the like).
What I object to are changes that obfuscate instead of clarify. A word or phrase should not "evolve" to mean precisely the opposite of what it was originally meant to. Language is designed to express thoughts and feelings and ideas. And when you can't find the right word to describe your thoughts or feelings, then go ahead, coin a new one -- I think that's pretty cool (not surprisingly, my favorite kids' author is Dr. Seuss). But when you redefine a word to include its opposite, then you just confuse your audience, who has to stop and think and process which meaning is intended. And that bothers me. That's the realm of politicians and corporate consultants, not something normal people should aspire to. And so that's where I draw the line -- where I think we should appropriately rage, rage against the dying of the light, instead of just saying, "meh, language changes."
Post by: Cwadda on August 14, 2017, 08:58:55 AM
Written in large, bold text, with extra clickbaity words colored differently.
"Millennials"
"You'll never guess his reaction"
"What she did next was astounding"
Other words/phrases that make me cringe:
"Literally" used to meant "really". That's not what it means!
"I can't."
-You can't what?
"I just can't"
-You just can't what?
"I just can't even"
-You can't even what?
"I just can't EVEN!"
Post by: Uturn on August 14, 2017, 09:40:54 AM
Person1: I disagree with your solution to <Problem> concerning <GroupX>
Person2: Why do you hate <GroupX>?
Person1: I never said that I hate <GroupX>, I simply feel there is a different solution to <Problem>.
Then we all get to see headlines about how Person1 hates <GroupX>, what are we going to do about Person1's hate speech. Meanwhile <Problem> is still not resolved.
Could it be that Person1 and Person2 grew up or lives in different circumstances and therefore view <Problem> from different perspectives, with neither being wrong?
Now if Person1 or Person2 said "eradicate <GroupX> and <Problem> goes away", we can call that hate.
Post by: Fishindude on August 14, 2017, 09:52:07 AM
Grass Fed
Farm Raised
These labels have created a bunch of food snobs that really don't know much about where there food came from, yet they see these labels not fully understanding them and condemn everything else not labeled in this manner.
Post by: Samuel on August 14, 2017, 10:10:04 AM
Post by: jambongris on August 14, 2017, 10:19:05 AM
Update: the NYT style guide says:QuoteUse apostrophes for plurals of abbreviations that have capital letters and periods: M.D.'s, C.P.A.'s. Also use apostrophes for plurals formed from single letters: He received A's and B's on his report card. Mind your p's and q's.
But do not use apostrophe's for plurals of abbreviations without periods, or for plurals formed from figures: TVs, PCs, DVDs; 1990s, 747s, size 7s.
So it depends, but "IRA's" is indeed incorrect. Now I know.
More thoughts on topic: I HATE "on accident," and I wish people would stop talking about "toxins" in food as opposed to in snake bites.
Wouldn't "IRA's" still be wrong according to the NYT Style Guide because it doesn't have both capital letters and periods? I think "I.R.A.'s" would be correct if it were ever written that way.
Post by: wenchsenior on August 14, 2017, 10:48:59 AM
Update: the NYT style guide says:QuoteUse apostrophes for plurals of abbreviations that have capital letters and periods: M.D.'s, C.P.A.'s. Also use apostrophes for plurals formed from single letters: He received A's and B's on his report card. Mind your p's and q's.
But do not use apostrophe's for plurals of abbreviations without periods, or for plurals formed from figures: TVs, PCs, DVDs; 1990s, 747s, size 7s.
So it depends, but "IRA's" is indeed incorrect. Now I know.
More thoughts on topic: I HATE "on accident," and I wish people would stop talking about "toxins" in food as opposed to in snake bites.
Wouldn't "IRA's" still be wrong according to the NYT Style Guide because it doesn't have both capital letters and periods? I think "I.R.A.'s" would be correct if it were ever written that way.
I think you missed the "incorrect" part. I also misread it late at night as "correct" and I was SO CONFUSED.
Post by: Paul der Krake on August 14, 2017, 11:09:48 AM
https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/74099/where-are-the-periods-in-acronyms
The plot thickens.
Post by: Travis on August 14, 2017, 12:15:29 PM
Organic
Grass Fed
Farm Raised
These labels have created a bunch of food snobs that really don't know much about where there food came from, yet they see these labels not fully understanding them and condemn everything else not labeled in this manner.
Organic is supposed to mean something that is alive. It describes an organism. We turned it into some description of a particular way of growing food (which even then is still vague). I was at the store yesterday and in the organic produce aisle they had a couple crates marked in English and French. The French word used to substitute organic food is apparently "biologique." To me this confirms how misused "organic" is in our culture that the French couldn't think of a better word to use for the translation. I imagine if a French speaker looked at a crate of food that was marked "biologique" they'd think "well, no shit. Of course it's alive."
Post by: Travis on August 14, 2017, 12:19:46 PM
Lol this thread is full of middle aged people hating on millennials I love it. That being said I hate the word "millennials" because it actually describes so few of us.
I've never understood why "millennial" somehow goes all the way back to people born in 1980. I was born that year. I'm creeping up on 40 years old, I have a salaried career, long-since completed my education, but the mass media wants to lump me in with folks who just graduated high school. Some of my friends who are the same age as me have kids in high school, but they're of this same "millennial" generation?
Post by: caffeine on August 14, 2017, 01:00:11 PM
Anything with SLAMS or DESTORYS in the headline makes me irrationally upset unless it is summing up WWE's Royal Rumble.
Post by: Laura33 on August 14, 2017, 01:23:13 PM
Well, that at least explains why I don't understand 'on fleek', then - don't use Vine, not planning to.
That's good, since it doesn't exist anymore.With respect to using and/or pioneering new words...I guess I will never be Shakespeare, lol.
I mean, I thought most scholarly understanding held that words Shakespeare "invented" were really just use of slang that wasn't recorded anywhere else. His audience obviously understood him, which is a little difficult if you just start inventing words out of thin air - they have to be culturally popularized first.A word or phrase should not "evolve" to mean precisely the opposite of what it was originally meant to.
So "peruse" and "nonplussed" must really frustrate you.
Peruse:
1. to examine or consider with attention and in detail : study
2. to look over or through in a casual or cursory manner
Nonplussed:
1. surprised and confused
2. not disconcerted; unperturbed
Language is crazy but that makes it fun, I think. For word nerds, a list of contronyms (words that are their own opposite): http://mentalfloss.com/article/49834/14-words-are-their-own-opposites (http://mentalfloss.com/article/49834/14-words-are-their-own-opposites)
The one that gets me is "scan," which nowadays invariably seems used to mean "skim." I didn't even realize the other two had alternate meanings now. :-)
Post by: Dicey on August 14, 2017, 01:37:36 PM
They're good words. I don't want them to go away, except that last one, I just wish people would use them correctly, gah!
Spendthrift
Penultimate
Nadir
Hoi polloi
Nonplussed
Inflammable
Irregardless
Of course, on this site, spendthrift is my favorite misused word, for what I hope is an obvious reason.
Post by: stackorstarve on August 14, 2017, 02:23:55 PM
Slight sidebar, feeding off earlier comments....
...
Another thing that gets me is using "off" instead of "on" in idiomatic phrases. (i.e. based on, feeding on, going on, etc.)
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
Post by: GuitarStv on August 14, 2017, 02:28:49 PM
Slight sidebar, feeding off earlier comments....
...
Another thing that gets me is using "off" instead of "on" in idiomatic phrases. (i.e. based on, feeding on, going on, etc.)
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
I figured that it was a simple omission typo. 'Feeding off of previous comments' makes as much sense as 'feeding on'.
Post by: tralfamadorian on August 14, 2017, 02:30:03 PM
I've never understood why "millennial" somehow goes all the way back to people born in 1980.
I've heard it explained as those who graduated from high school in 2000 or later.
Post by: NoraLenderbee on August 14, 2017, 03:15:50 PM
“on a daily basis”. We have a word that efficiently summarizes that phrase. It’s “daily.”
Likewise on a monthly/weekly/yearly/regular/periodic basis.
“In the event of [something happening]”. How about “If [something] happens,” “In case of [something]”?
The addition of unnecessary "of" to adverbs and prepositions. Feeding off of. Outside of. Getting off of.
Post by: Dicey on August 14, 2017, 03:25:42 PM
Well, shit, I was going to fix it, but now I don't know what to do. I do say "based on", but when the feeding is kind of an act of extraction or removal, "feeding off" seems more logical than "feeding on". Is only "on" correct?Slight sidebar, feeding off earlier comments....
...
Another thing that gets me is using "off" instead of "on" in idiomatic phrases. (i.e. based on, feeding on, going on, etc.)
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
I figured that it was a simple omission typo. 'Feeding off of previous comments' makes as much sense as 'feeding on'.
GuitarStv, thinking it's a typo coming from me is pretty darn accurate, lol!
Post by: stackorstarve on August 14, 2017, 03:54:52 PM
"off of" is also formally wrong but used conversationally in the US. This one doesn't bother me as much as other stuff thoughWell, shit, I was going to fix it, but now I don't know what to do. I do say "based on", but when the feeding is kind of an act of extraction or removal, "feeding off" seems more logical than "feeding on". Is only "on" correct?Slight sidebar, feeding off earlier comments....
...
Another thing that gets me is using "off" instead of "on" in idiomatic phrases. (i.e. based on, feeding on, going on, etc.)
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
I figured that it was a simple omission typo. 'Feeding off of previous comments' makes as much sense as 'feeding on'.
GuitarStv, thinking it's a typo coming from me is pretty darn accurate, lol!
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
Post by: dougules on August 14, 2017, 04:04:45 PM
On a sidenote, this reminds me of Weird Al's "Word Crimes."
Post by: Travis on August 14, 2017, 04:05:00 PM
Post by: Morning Glory on August 14, 2017, 04:15:33 PM
"off of" is also formally wrong but used conversationally in the US. This one doesn't bother me as much as other stuff thoughWell, shit, I was going to fix it, but now I don't know what to do. I do say "based on", but when the feeding is kind of an act of extraction or removal, "feeding off" seems more logical than "feeding on". Is only "on" correct?Slight sidebar, feeding off earlier comments....
...
Another thing that gets me is using "off" instead of "on" in idiomatic phrases. (i.e. based on, feeding on, going on, etc.)
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
I figured that it was a simple omission typo. 'Feeding off of previous comments' makes as much sense as 'feeding on'.
GuitarStv, thinking it's a typo coming from me is pretty darn accurate, lol!
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
Could be some regional preferences at play here. I lived in one place where people said they had to " be to" somewhere as in " I have to be to work by nine" instead of " be at work" or "go to work" Drove me crazy.
In the place I live now people use the word"feel" when discussing facts they are not completely sure of as in " I feel like the conversion from fahrenheit to Celsius is five ninths minus thirty two". Sounds really non-committal. They also use this expression as a polite way of correcting someone.
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on August 14, 2017, 04:31:13 PM
baby bump is OK, being descriptive. In Australia we sometimes use ‘preggers’ Take your choice.
I detest 'preggers'.
And 'hubby'.
And 'hubs'.
And 'wifey'.
And 'work husband'/'work wife'.
And 'the boyfriend'. As in, Look what the boyfriend bought me.
Post by: calimom on August 14, 2017, 05:39:05 PM
baby bump is OK, being descriptive. In Australia we sometimes use ‘preggers’ Take your choice.
I detest 'preggers'.
And 'hubby'.
And 'hubs'.
And 'wifey'.
And 'work husband'/'work wife'.
And 'the boyfriend'. As in, Look what the boyfriend bought me.
I am so with you! "Hubby" and "Wifey" are so….1955. "The wife" sounds like the person in question is describing a household appliance.
"Hubs" is just ugh.
May I add to the list:
* Push Present (because every woman needs jewelry or an SUV after giving birth, and then needs to share that information)
Post by: marble_faun on August 14, 2017, 06:38:27 PM
toxic people
Breaking. Up. Sentences. Like. This.
self-care
amirite?
"I just NOPED right out of there."
"bad skin" or "good skin" [If it's keeping your organs from falling out of your body, it's doing its job!]
****
I don't have logical, well-thought-out reasons for disliking most of these. I'm just weary of them. Weary of the realms of internet where they tend appear in the wild.
Post by: Miss Piggy on August 14, 2017, 06:58:21 PM
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on August 14, 2017, 09:16:26 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/MealPrepSunday/comments/6tol88/baby_due_in_2_weeks_prepped_my_ass_off_today/
Quote
OP: Luckily grandma and great grandma live nearby and I have a feeling they will be more than generous food-wise.
Quote
Commenter: How lucky are you to still have your great grandmother alive. Really cool!
Quote
Commenter 2: I mean, they could still be alive, but I think it more probable she is speaking on behalf the pending baby. OP?
Quote
OP: Baby's great grandma aka my grandma. Baby will be the first great grandchild on both sides of the family!
Kid's not even here yet! Stop promoting your relatives and expecting the rest of us to follow along.
Post by: Dicey on August 15, 2017, 12:51:17 AM
I love your hate list!baby bump is OK, being descriptive. In Australia we sometimes use ‘preggers’ Take your choice.
I detest 'preggers'.
And 'hubby'.
And 'hubs'.
And 'wifey'.
And 'work husband'/'work wife'.
And 'the boyfriend'. As in, Look what the boyfriend bought me.
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on August 15, 2017, 12:53:37 AM
I love your hate list!baby bump is OK, being descriptive. In Australia we sometimes use ‘preggers’ Take your choice.
I detest 'preggers'.
And 'hubby'.
And 'hubs'.
And 'wifey'.
And 'work husband'/'work wife'.
And 'the boyfriend'. As in, Look what the boyfriend bought me.
Spread the love!
Post by: Paul der Krake on August 15, 2017, 03:10:12 AM
The real question is thus: when is it acceptable to spell acronyms with periods?MORE THICKENING:
https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/74099/where-are-the-periods-in-acronyms
The plot thickens.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/14/business/dealbook/merck-trump-charlottesville-ceos.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-1&action=click&contentCollection=Business%20Day®ion=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article
The NYTimes (at least the business section) doesn't even respect its own guidelines! It's using C.E.O.s, even though there are periods in the acronym.
Death to apostrophes. Death to periodical acronyms.
Post by: GenXbiker on August 15, 2017, 06:20:55 AM
loosing instead of losing
loose instead of lose
Post by: Cwadda on August 15, 2017, 07:46:57 AM
I hate sensationalism and click-bait news. I'm seriously thinking about subscribing to WSJ or NYT or something.
Anything with SLAMS or DESTORYS in the headline makes me irrationally upset unless it is summing up WWE's Royal Rumble.
This!
"White guy DESTROYS black lives matter in 30 seconds!!!"
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on August 15, 2017, 10:23:29 AM
Post by: dougules on August 15, 2017, 11:13:21 AM
Post by: Dicey on August 15, 2017, 12:30:23 PM
Post by: calimom on August 15, 2017, 08:12:47 PM
"Payed" instead of "Paid". I do not get where that one even comes from.
It would be understandable spelling for someone new to the English language, but when you see it used by those who claim to have a college education, it baffles.
"Anyways" always grates with me. But apparently it is not entirely incorrect:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-anyway-and-anyways/
Post by: Miss Piggy on August 15, 2017, 08:14:40 PM
Post by: GenXbiker on August 15, 2017, 09:11:35 PM
your instead of you're
Post by: calimom on August 15, 2017, 10:36:27 PM
Here's another very common one on this forum:
your instead of you're
And there instead of their. Fourth graders know this.
Post by: nnls on August 15, 2017, 10:55:42 PM
Preventative. Please, just say preventive. Same with orientated; just say oriented.
isn't this a difference between American English and British English though?
I don't think here in Australia I have ever heard anyone use oriented or preventive though maybe I am just hanging out with the wrong people
Post by: MightyMauler on August 18, 2017, 08:46:59 AM
Life hack
Money hack
Food hack
Beauty hack
I was a bit surprised this hadn’t already made the list.
Post by: Paul der Krake on August 18, 2017, 08:58:12 AM
It is. Orientated is perfectly valid.Preventative. Please, just say preventive. Same with orientated; just say oriented.
isn't this a difference between American English and British English though?
I don't think here in Australia I have ever heard anyone use oriented or preventive though maybe I am just hanging out with the wrong people
Post by: Dicey on August 18, 2017, 09:48:05 AM
"We often make new words by adding suffixes. For example, we got the word syndication by adding the -ion suffix to the end of the verb syndicate. But the process can also work in reverse: we can make new words by dropping suffixes. For example, we got the verb edit by dropping the suffix from editor. That’s called back formation, and it’s how lexicographers think we got the word orientate—by dropping the -ion suffix from orientation.
Orient and orientate are both acceptable English verbs, but orient has become the preferred form in American English, whereas orientate coexists more strongly with orient in British English. If you’re writing for Americans, you’d write about family-oriented activities; but for a British audience, you may write about family-orientated activities.
Although the Verb Orient Is Still More Common Than Orientate in British English, Orientate Is More Common in British English Than It Is in American English. [This bit was between the omitted charts, which may explain the wonky caps.]
To sum up*, in both cases there’s a preferred form in American English—the shorter form: preventive and orient—but in both cases the other word isn’t wrong either."
* Dicey here from the Department of Redundancy Department. Does anyone sum down? Just wondering ;-)
Post by: Miss Piggy on August 18, 2017, 10:07:16 AM
Post by: Cache_Stash on August 18, 2017, 10:52:02 AM
I can't even describe the emotions that "word" evokes in my soul.
Post by: teen persuasion on August 18, 2017, 09:35:15 PM
Prolly
I can't even describe the emotions that "word" evokes in my soul.
Is this a regional contraction? I've seen it multiple times on forums, but I've never ever heard it said. In my area probably is commonly shortened to prob'ly.
Post by: Dicey on August 18, 2017, 11:29:25 PM
Post by: Cache_Stash on August 19, 2017, 05:22:21 AM
Prolly
I can't even describe the emotions that "word" evokes in my soul.
Is this a regional contraction? I've seen it multiple times on forums, but I've never ever heard it said. In my area probably is commonly shortened to prob'ly.
I frequent a forum that ha a global participation and I only see prolly. I really dislike the use of that fake word
Post by: Leisured on August 19, 2017, 06:51:26 AM
on a daily basis daily thanks NoraLenderBe
and ...
at this point in time now
obligated obliged. 'Obligation' is a noun from the verb 'oblige', so we see a new verb 'obligated' formed from the noun 'obligation'.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 19, 2017, 08:02:37 AM
Post by: Paul der Krake on August 19, 2017, 08:08:07 AM
This was a fun read. You all do know that there is a Grammar Nazi thread that has already aired these and more?People need to be reminded we're here, watching, judging.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 19, 2017, 08:13:28 AM
This was a fun read. You all do know that there is a Grammar Nazi thread that has already aired these and more?People need to be reminded we're here, watching, judging.
When I taught College and University, I was amazed at the range of writing skills. Some students were great. Some needed 4 re-writes to get to the point that their work was comprehensible. Not good, mind you, just starting to be clear.
I blame spell check for the your/you're, there/their, to/two/too issues. People get complacent and don't proof-read.
We even have "Weird forum choices" spelled as Weird fourm choices" in Off Topic.
Post by: iris lily on August 19, 2017, 08:26:09 AM
ok, that made me laugh!This was a fun read. You all do know that there is a Grammar Nazi thread that has already aired these and more?People need to be reminded we're here, watching, judging.
Post by: Dicey on August 19, 2017, 10:23:46 AM
ok, that made me laugh!This was a fun read. You all do know that there is a Grammar Nazi thread that has already aired these and more?People need to be reminded we're here, watching, judging.
So did this:
We even have "Weird forum choices" spelled as Weird fourm choices" in Off Topic.
Oh, my kingdom for a better MMM Forum search engine! There are so many new threads started when a perfectly useful one is currently in existence, but not easily located.
Post by: squirrel on August 20, 2017, 10:12:54 AM
I'd like to add "needs <done>" where people miss out the "to be" part, e.g. a car needs moved / this needs done by Friday / the room needs cleaned.
Also, management-speak in my workplace, where you can tell who is in the top inner circle by their excessive use of the phrase "the reality is..." right before giving an excuse for why things aren't better.
Post by: Miss Piggy on August 20, 2017, 10:22:27 AM
I'd like to add "needs <done>" where people miss out the "to be" part, e.g. a car needs moved / this needs done by Friday / the room needs cleaned.
On a related note, I'll add "because <reason>" where people leave out the "of." For example, "I need to move my car because hailstorm." Or, "Our kitchen is in a shambles because remodeling."
Post by: calimom on August 21, 2017, 05:54:40 PM
I'd like to add "needs <done>" where people miss out the "to be" part, e.g. a car needs moved / this needs done by Friday / the room needs cleaned.
On a related note, I'll add "because <reason>" where people leave out the "of." For example, "I need to move my car because hailstorm." Or, "Our kitchen is in a shambles because remodeling."
The first example might be a regional thing. West Virginia/Pennsylvania and perhaps other places. I agree, it sounds odd.
Second example is because hipster-speak. Or because irony.
Post by: wenchsenior on August 22, 2017, 07:46:41 AM
I'd like to add "needs <done>" where people miss out the "to be" part, e.g. a car needs moved / this needs done by Friday / the room needs cleaned.
On a related note, I'll add "because <reason>" where people leave out the "of." For example, "I need to move my car because hailstorm." Or, "Our kitchen is in a shambles because remodeling."
The first example might be a regional thing. West Virginia/Pennsylvania and perhaps other places. I agree, it sounds odd.
Second example is because hipster-speak. Or because irony.
Yes, I suspect the "needs washed" etc. construction might be regional. My husband used this and didn't realize it was incorrect until he was an adult in graduate school...years later, he still sometimes pauses and self-checks his grammar to see that he's constructing the sentence correctly. I'm not sure if he picked it up from family or from the Pacific NW region where he grew up. However, the only other person I've heard regularly using it (a podcaster) was also from the PNW, so...
Post by: dougules on August 22, 2017, 10:30:55 AM
I'd like to add "needs <done>" where people miss out the "to be" part, e.g. a car needs moved / this needs done by Friday / the room needs cleaned.
On a related note, I'll add "because <reason>" where people leave out the "of." For example, "I need to move my car because hailstorm." Or, "Our kitchen is in a shambles because remodeling."
The first example might be a regional thing. West Virginia/Pennsylvania and perhaps other places. I agree, it sounds odd.
Second example is because hipster-speak. Or because irony.
Yes, I suspect the "needs washed" etc. construction might be regional. My husband used this and didn't realize it was incorrect until he was an adult in graduate school...years later, he still sometimes pauses and self-checks his grammar to see that he's constructing the sentence correctly. I'm not sure if he picked it up from family or from the Pacific NW region where he grew up. However, the only other person I've heard regularly using it (a podcaster) was also from the PNW, so...
The first example is definitely a Pennsylvania thing, and it may have come from Pennsylvania Dutch. The second one I've never heard of.
Post by: pbkmaine on August 22, 2017, 10:41:17 AM
Post by: dougules on August 22, 2017, 10:59:07 AM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Post by: Travis on August 22, 2017, 11:07:55 AM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Sorry to use you as an example, but this one bugs the hell out of me. Unique means one of a kind. You can't have degrees of uniqueness.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on August 22, 2017, 11:22:11 AM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Sorry to use you as an example, but this one bugs the hell out of me. Unique means one of a kind. You can't have degrees of uniqueness.
Wow, you have to be a hardcore grammar Nazi for that one to bother you.
Post by: Paul der Krake on August 22, 2017, 11:47:16 AM
Wow, you have to be a hardcore grammar Nazi for that one to bother you.As opposed to a soft grammar Nazi? Gah! Weren't you listening?
Post by: Samuel on August 22, 2017, 11:57:26 AM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Sorry to use you as an example, but this one bugs the hell out of me. Unique means one of a kind. You can't have degrees of uniqueness.
Wow, you have to be a hardcore grammar Nazi for that one to bother you.
Or a fan of the West Wing. Thanks, Bartlet.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on August 22, 2017, 12:08:40 PM
Preventative. Please, just say preventive. Same with orientated; just say oriented.
I have never heard the word "preventive" in my life. I did not know that an alternative to "preventative" existed.
Contrarily, I only started hearing "orientated" a few years ago. It's like nails on a chalkboard. I will remain "oriented" for life, bro-dawgs.
Post by: Morning Glory on August 22, 2017, 03:16:36 PM
I grew up in the Midwest hearing "needs washed" and similar. I knew it was not correct usage, but thought of it as a harmless abbreviation that people use in speech but not writing.
While we are on odd regionalisms I have noticed that people in the north use the word "yet" very strangely. I am used to the "are we there yet" sort of usage to imply something that has not already happened. People here sometimes use in place of "still" to talk about something that is happening already. For example "do you live in Iowa yet?" meaning "do you still live in Iowa?". I find this confusing.
Post by: dougules on August 22, 2017, 04:03:22 PM
"Trial" as a verb. Ugh. Heard it again at a work meeting today. "We are trialing a new product " Why can't we just try it? Or conduct a trial of the product?
I grew up in the Midwest hearing "needs washed" and similar. I knew it was not correct usage, but thought of it as a harmless abbreviation that people use in speech but not writing.
While we are on odd regionalisms I have noticed that people in the north use the word "yet" very strangely. I am used to the "are we there yet" sort of usage to imply something that has not already happened. People here sometimes use in place of "still" to talk about something that is happening already. For example "do you live in Iowa yet?" meaning "do you still live in Iowa?". I find this confusing.
Wasn't "yet" used like that a few centuries ago? The dictionary still has that meaning. It does sound odd though. All the old uses I've seen put the "yet" before the verb like "Dost thou yet live in Iowa?"
Post by: Travis on August 22, 2017, 06:36:19 PM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Sorry to use you as an example, but this one bugs the hell out of me. Unique means one of a kind. You can't have degrees of uniqueness.
Wow, you have to be a hardcore grammar Nazi for that one to bother you.
Or a fan of the West Wing. Thanks, Bartlet.
I remember that episode now that you mention it, but no, my grammar issues stem from being taught proper grammar at age 28 then putting it to use in grad school where most of my classmates couldn't write to save their lives.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 22, 2017, 07:13:14 PM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Sorry to use you as an example, but this one bugs the hell out of me. Unique means one of a kind. You can't have degrees of uniqueness.
Wow, you have to be a hardcore grammar Nazi for that one to bother you.
There are lots of us in the wild, we are not unique, we are legion.
Post by: iris lily on August 22, 2017, 07:50:53 PM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Sorry to use you as an example, but this one bugs the hell out of me. Unique means one of a kind. You can't have degrees of uniqueness.
Wow, you have to be a hardcore grammar Nazi for that one to bother you.
No, it bothers me, too.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on August 23, 2017, 06:13:45 AM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Sorry to use you as an example, but this one bugs the hell out of me. Unique means one of a kind. You can't have degrees of uniqueness.
Wow, you have to be a hardcore grammar Nazi for that one to bother you.
No, it bothers me, too.
Then you've chosen your side.
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/520/073/eb9.jpg)
Post by: dougules on August 23, 2017, 10:50:29 AM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Sorry to use you as an example, but this one bugs the hell out of me. Unique means one of a kind. You can't have degrees of uniqueness.
Wow, you have to be a hardcore grammar Nazi for that one to bother you.
There are lots of us in the wild, we are not unique, we are legion.
Commas instead of periods/semicolons, irony? I can't tell.
There are degrees of unique. You can have a unique shade of green, or you can just have a unique color altogether. A unique color is more unique than a new different shade of green. If you have a bunch of 4's in a row, a 5 is unique. An tilde is much more unique.
Post by: Travis on August 23, 2017, 11:08:00 AM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Sorry to use you as an example, but this one bugs the hell out of me. Unique means one of a kind. You can't have degrees of uniqueness.
Wow, you have to be a hardcore grammar Nazi for that one to bother you.
There are lots of us in the wild, we are not unique, we are legion.
Commas instead of periods/semicolons, irony? I can't tell.
There are degrees of unique. You can have a unique shade of green, or you can just have a unique color altogether. A unique color is more unique than a new different shade of green. If you have a bunch of 4's in a row, a 5 is unique. An tilde is much more unique.
Those aren't degrees. Those are absolutes in their own right. You can have a unique shade of green (grammatically, though a shade amongst thousands I wouldn't consider special), but that shade can't be more unique than something else, nor can it be very unique. Something is one of a kind or it isn't. If it isn't, then you need to pick another adjective.
Post by: Cache_Stash on August 23, 2017, 11:21:04 AM
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/needs-washed
Ok, that makes sense. DH grew up in Pennsylvania Dutch country, but his Mom is from a small town near Pittsburgh. Pittsburghese is very unique.
Sorry to use you as an example, but this one bugs the hell out of me. Unique means one of a kind. You can't have degrees of uniqueness.
Wow, you have to be a hardcore grammar Nazi for that one to bother you.
There are lots of us in the wild, we are not unique, we are legion.
Commas instead of periods/semicolons, irony? I can't tell.
There are degrees of unique. You can have a unique shade of green, or you can just have a unique color altogether. A unique color is more unique than a new different shade of green. If you have a bunch of 4's in a row, a 5 is unique. An tilde is much more unique.
Those aren't degrees. Those are absolutes in their own right. You can have a unique shade of green (grammatically, though a shade amongst thousands I wouldn't consider special), but that shade can't be more unique than something else, nor can it be very unique. Something is one of a kind or it isn't. If it isn't, then you need to pick another adjective.
Agreed.
Unique is a binary word. It either is or isn't; on or off; black or white; yes or no. Any word that is binary or absolute should never have an adjective describing how much or to what degree.
In the world of chaos, though, every person has a different truth. If I were to show a picture of a table, some might think it is only a 7 on a scale of one to 10 on it's "table-ness". Some might think it is more a 10. If it were an end-table, the viewpoints would probably change. A dining room table might be considered more of a table than a cocktail table. So, are the different degrees of how unique something may be?
In some ways I think it may be argued otherwise.
I would say the word "Unique" is about a 9 on a scale of one to ten as far as being a binary word. Therefore, I would probably argue it is close enough and does not need additional help from the word "very".
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on August 24, 2017, 06:02:00 AM
I would say the word "Unique" is about a 9 on a scale of one to ten as far as being a binary word. Therefore, I would probably argue it is close enough and does not need additional help from the word "very".
I find it fascinating that you don't seem to have any difficulty in ascribing a scale of 1-10 for degrees of "binary-ness", yet you seem rather certain that there cannot be varying degrees of uniqueness. It would appear that you consider the word "binary" to be non-binary. If you don't hear from me again, my head probably exploded from the irony.
Bonus thought: Why aren't irony and steely synonyms?
Post by: FrugalToque on August 24, 2017, 06:17:45 AM
"Seriously?" should come to an end, as well. It's the current generation's "Totally, totally ..."
Toque.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 24, 2017, 07:28:13 AM
Post by: Travis on August 24, 2017, 10:52:21 AM
"Prolly" has to go. I agree with that.
"Seriously?" should come to an end, as well. It's the current generation's "Totally, totally ..."
Toque.
My 8 year old nephew shouts "Seriously!?" to anything that surprises him or requires an emotional response. He also just spams whatever he knows will annoy the adults in the room. The last time I saw him everything was "Epic!" He also has no sense of volume control which in all honesty casts a shadow over anything that comes out of his mouth.
Post by: Cache_Stash on August 24, 2017, 11:23:00 AM
"Prolly" has to go. I agree with that.
"Seriously?" should come to an end, as well. It's the current generation's "Totally, totally ..."
Toque.
Totally!
Seriously.
+1
Post by: Cache_Stash on August 24, 2017, 11:34:27 AM
I would say the word "Unique" is about a 9 on a scale of one to ten as far as being a binary word. Therefore, I would probably argue it is close enough and does not need additional help from the word "very".
I find it fascinating that you don't seem to have any difficulty in ascribing a scale of 1-10 for degrees of "binary-ness", yet you seem rather certain that there cannot be varying degrees of uniqueness. It would appear that you consider the word "binary" to be non-binary. If you don't hear from me again, my head probably exploded from the irony.
Bonus thought: Why aren't irony and steely synonyms?
My point was truth could be in the eye of the beholder. I was proposing another POV.
Was the Pacer more unique than the Thing? I would say they were both unique. To what degree? Only the beholder determines his own truth and may think the Pacer is not unique but the Thing is unique. Others may think the one is "more" unique than the other.
http://www.eyeontheparanormal.com/head_explode.jpg
To be clear. I was only proposing other POVs. I don't care for people using modifiers on binary terms. It is unnecessary and not needed. :)
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 25, 2017, 09:09:04 AM
Calling toques "beanies" has to go as well.
Today I learned that "toque" is a real English word.
Well, it is a borrowed word. But English is full of borrowed words.
Post by: Travis on August 25, 2017, 09:47:06 AM
Calling toques "beanies" has to go as well.
Today I learned that "toque" is a real English word.
Well, it is a borrowed word. But English is full of borrowed words.
The pesky Normans...
Post by: acroy on August 25, 2017, 09:50:33 AM
i.e.
"No, (opinion other than mine) is not okay"
alrighty then, now I'm convinced!
Post by: Travis on August 25, 2017, 09:56:29 AM
Post by: BlueHouse on August 25, 2017, 05:15:49 PM
I thought of another one: relevancy. Again, what's with the extra syllable? Just say relevance.
Any kind of extra words or syllables:
I am wanting to (I want to)
I am looking to (I want to)
I've got to or I have got to (I have to)
And also, for no particular reason:
Artisanal.
Post by: Mac_MacGyver on August 25, 2017, 08:11:34 PM
Post by: calimom on August 25, 2017, 10:49:15 PM
What does that really mean? Take the tail pipes off the Harley? Drink all the booze? Spend all the money? It is just so stupid.
Post by: BlueHouse on August 26, 2017, 11:40:48 AM
I'm not religious and I fricking hate when people foist their religions on me.
Post by: kissthesky on August 26, 2017, 01:07:38 PM
"I could care less"
+1! When people say "I could care less" I think most people mean "I couldn't care less"
Post by: wenchsenior on August 26, 2017, 03:39:18 PM
"have a blessed day".
I'm not religious and I fricking hate when people foist their religions on me.
Be glad you don't live here. Everyone from check out clerks to grocery baggers to auto mechanics say that here. Not to mention that a significant fraction of the doctors at the University hospital will end your appointment by asking if they can pray with/over you. I usually tell them to do so for themselves if it makes the feel good, but honestly? It makes my skin CRAWL.
Post by: daverobev on August 26, 2017, 06:26:24 PM
(Gasp! Oh, no, wait, I'm British, living in Canada. Nobody says child/children).
2.0. 3.0.
No, it's just 2, or 3. 2.1? Sure. 2.174? Ok. 2.0000000000? No. You don't need to (always, every time) say "two point oh!".
Post by: Dicey on August 27, 2017, 12:54:16 AM
"have a blessed day".Oh, but which pronunciation do you hate more?
I'm not religious and I fricking hate when people foist their religions on me.
Bless-said
- or -
Blest?
Ugh!
Post by: mc6 on August 27, 2017, 05:04:49 AM
Post by: GenXbiker on August 27, 2017, 09:38:46 AM
Post by: Cache_Stash on August 29, 2017, 03:16:32 PM
Ranks right up there with Prolly
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on August 30, 2017, 06:11:52 AM
"have a blessed day".Oh, but which pronunciation do you hate more?
I'm not religious and I fricking hate when people foist their religions on me.
Bless-said
- or -
Blest?
Ugh!
Oh, I hate that one as well. I never heard it until I moved to Mississippi. EVERYONE said it there. I've since lived in Florida and Georgia, and I will occasionally hear someone say it here, but very rarely.
Post by: davisgang90 on August 30, 2017, 06:44:03 AM
Everything I've learned about Canada is from Bob and Doug McKenzie, including toque.Calling toques "beanies" has to go as well.
Today I learned that "toque" is a real English word.
Post by: marielle on August 30, 2017, 07:21:58 AM
Post by: simonsez on August 30, 2017, 07:25:34 AM
melting pot
Same here! You can splurge and have the fondue meal of a lifetime at home for less than 1/5th the price of that ripoff restaurant.
Post by: iluvzbeach on August 30, 2017, 07:59:45 AM
The addition of "up" when it's not needed.
Examples:
Print up vs. print
Mix up [ingredients] vs. mix
When did "gift" become a verb? The list goes on and on.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on August 30, 2017, 08:20:07 AM
When did "gift" become a verb? The list goes on and on.
According to the Online Etymology Dictionary (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gift&allowed_in_frame=0), the use of "gift" as a verb dates to at least the 16th century. I've certainly known "gift" as a verb for as long as I've been aware of what a verb is.
Post by: Dicey on August 30, 2017, 09:44:48 AM
I wish most of the overused words in my workplace would go away. Collaborative! Forward-leaning! The overuse of the semi colon! In day to day life, the words smoothie, beanie, sweetie...I agree with your workplace words and beanie. I realize that sweetie has to be used judiciously, but I'm not sure about smoothie. Since a smoothie is a real thing, what word would you use instead?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 31, 2017, 06:09:00 AM
Everything I've learned about Canada is from Bob and Doug McKenzie, including toque.Calling toques "beanies" has to go as well.
Today I learned that "toque" is a real English word.
Oh dear. Oh. Ouch.
Mind you, 2-4 is a valid term.
Post by: calimom on August 31, 2017, 11:00:50 AM
Post by: wenchsenior on August 31, 2017, 04:45:49 PM
I don't know what "woke" means, and I don't intend to find out.
Even more horrible is "woke bae." The first few times I heard it I thought it was a foreign phrase. Eventually, I realized it was some kind of slang that a whole bunch of podcasters AND pundits started saying to be either cool or ironic or both. So then I had to go look it up. WHAT A STUPID FUCKING PHRASE. Why would people want to sound mentally impaired when they speak?
What's even funnier is that 'bae' apparently is actually the Danish word for 'shit'. I wonder if most of the 'hip' crowd realize this?
In other news, I will try to cut down on my use of 'adulting,' based on this thread.
Post by: Adventine on August 31, 2017, 08:46:34 PM
"As per my previous email..."
"As per checking..."
"Greetings!"
Sigh.
Post by: calimom on August 31, 2017, 10:43:06 PM
Post by: davisgang90 on September 01, 2017, 05:19:17 AM
I shuttered, but it didn't phase me.Don't phase me Bro!
Post by: GenXbiker on September 03, 2017, 02:22:33 PM
Post by: BlueHouse on September 03, 2017, 03:53:10 PM
"undocumented immigrant" instead of illegal alien or illegal immigrant. Don't downplay it - call it like it is.Some would say that your words are the ones that attach judgment to the status of a person, so your description would be "up-playing it" in your parlance. Most people agree that human beings aren't "illegal". But their status may be documented or undocumented.
Post by: GenXbiker on September 03, 2017, 04:04:12 PM
"undocumented immigrant" instead of illegal alien or illegal immigrant. Don't downplay it - call it like it is.Some would say that your words are the ones that attach judgment to the status of a person, so your description would be "up-playing it" in your parlance. Most people agree that human beings aren't "illegal". But their status may be documented or undocumented.
"They" would be wrong to say that those humans aren't illegal. This is direct from government documentation:
"Illegal Alien
Also known as an "Undocumented Alien," is an alien who has entered the United States illegally and is deportable if apprehended, or an alien who entered the United States legally but who has fallen "out of status" and is deportable."
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/immigration-terms-and-definitions-involving-aliens
Also, see:
http://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/sorry-the-accurate-legal-term-illegal-alien
Post by: iris lily on September 03, 2017, 10:55:40 PM
Would we be allowed to say "he is here illegally? " We can say " he has a gun illegally.""undocumented immigrant" instead of illegal alien or illegal immigrant. Don't downplay it - call it like it is.Some would say that your words are the ones that attach judgment to the status of a person, so your description would be "up-playing it" in your parlance. Most people agree that human beings aren't "illegal". But their status may be documented or undocumented.
Or should I say " he is an undocmented gun owner" to indicate he has no permit?
Anyway.
I hate this new custom of cutting off part of the word " invitation" and saying "I received an invite to Jessie's party."
Post by: RetiredAt63 on September 04, 2017, 06:12:30 AM
Post by: marble_faun on September 04, 2017, 12:57:39 PM
It is one thing to turn a noun into a verb if there is no appropriate verb, but when there is an appropriate verb, stop!! I rant because I just saw an article about someone wearing her "hand-loomed" shawl. Ack. It is a hand-woven shawl, we have the vocabulary, people. A loom is a structure on which cloth is woven, not loomed. Weave, weaving, woven, not loom, looming, loomed.
They probably just meant that a large, floating hand perpetually looms over the shawl.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on September 04, 2017, 02:21:20 PM
It is one thing to turn a noun into a verb if there is no appropriate verb, but when there is an appropriate verb, stop!! I rant because I just saw an article about someone wearing her "hand-loomed" shawl. Ack. It is a hand-woven shawl, we have the vocabulary, people. A loom is a structure on which cloth is woven, not loomed. Weave, weaving, woven, not loom, looming, loomed.
They probably just meant that a large, floating hand perpetually looms over the shawl.
Ooooh, I want to see that. ;-) It would be correct usage, almost.
Post by: GenXbiker on September 05, 2017, 09:23:11 AM
"undocumented immigrant" instead of illegal alien or illegal immigrant. Don't downplay it - call it like it is.Some would say that your words are the ones that attach judgment to the status of a person, so your description would be "up-playing it" in your parlance. Most people agree that human beings aren't "illegal". But their status may be documented or undocumented.
"They" would be wrong to say that those humans aren't illegal. This is direct from government documentation:
"Illegal Alien
Also known as an "Undocumented Alien," is an alien who has entered the United States illegally and is deportable if apprehended, or an alien who entered the United States legally but who has fallen "out of status" and is deportable."
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/immigration-terms-and-definitions-involving-aliens
Also, see:
http://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/sorry-the-accurate-legal-term-illegal-alien
And on the same topic, in light of the latest news, how about "dreamers?" Please!
Post by: GuitarStv on September 05, 2017, 09:57:55 AM
"undocumented immigrant" instead of illegal alien or illegal immigrant. Don't downplay it - call it like it is.Some would say that your words are the ones that attach judgment to the status of a person, so your description would be "up-playing it" in your parlance. Most people agree that human beings aren't "illegal". But their status may be documented or undocumented.
"They" would be wrong to say that those humans aren't illegal. This is direct from government documentation:
"Illegal Alien - Also known as an "Undocumented Alien," is an alien who has entered the United States illegally and is deportable if apprehended, or an alien who entered the United States legally but who has fallen "out of status" and is deportable."
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/immigration-terms-and-definitions-involving-aliens
Also, see:
http://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/sorry-the-accurate-legal-term-illegal-alien
It's weird that you feel the need to use the term 'Illegal Alien' while referencing a website that indicates the equivalency of 'Illegal' and 'Undocumented' while referencing the term.
Mod Note: Please rephrase this, there's a better way to make your point in a less offensive manner.
Post by: GenXbiker on September 05, 2017, 10:10:27 AM
"undocumented immigrant" instead of illegal alien or illegal immigrant. Don't downplay it - call it like it is.Some would say that your words are the ones that attach judgment to the status of a person, so your description would be "up-playing it" in your parlance. Most people agree that human beings aren't "illegal". But their status may be documented or undocumented.
"They" would be wrong to say that those humans aren't illegal. This is direct from government documentation:
"Illegal Alien - Also known as an "Undocumented Alien," is an alien who has entered the United States illegally and is deportable if apprehended, or an alien who entered the United States legally but who has fallen "out of status" and is deportable."
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/immigration-terms-and-definitions-involving-aliens
Also, see:
http://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/sorry-the-accurate-legal-term-illegal-alien
It's weird that you feel the need to use the term 'Illegal Alien' while referencing a website that indicates the equivalency of 'Illegal' and 'Undocumented' while referencing the term.
Both websites specifically state "illegal alien" as a government term. If you read the comments prior to yours, you will see that I was responding to someone that didn't think humans could actually be illegal. So I linked to the government documentation that specifically defines "illegal alien" while mentioning "undocumented alien" as an alternative. If you look at my very first comment on the topic, you will see that the terminology I would like to go away is "undocumented immigrant." I guess, I'm not sure what is so difficult to understand about that or why I should even have to explain it. People having been posting some pretty minor things that they would like to see go away, and this is one of mine. You don't have to agree with it, despite the government definition.
Quote
Even stranger given that your ancestry is not native and you are a multi-generational anchor baby who descended from illegal alien stock.
I'm a multi-generation American and legal through and through. Did you see me complain about anchor babies being considered illegal? They are actually considered citizens, as crazy as that might sound. Although, I don't see what that has to do with me posting about terminology I would like to see go away. Are you confused or trying to confuse others? Are you going to complain about any other posts here? I find it strange that you are singling me out.
Post by: BlueHouse on September 05, 2017, 01:40:14 PM
"undocumented immigrant" instead of illegal alien or illegal immigrant. Don't downplay it - call it like it is.Some would say that your words are the ones that attach judgment to the status of a person, so your description would be "up-playing it" in your parlance. Most people agree that human beings aren't "illegal". But their status may be documented or undocumented.
"They" would be wrong to say that those humans aren't illegal. This is direct from government documentation:
"Illegal Alien - Also known as an "Undocumented Alien," is an alien who has entered the United States illegally and is deportable if apprehended, or an alien who entered the United States legally but who has fallen "out of status" and is deportable."
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/immigration-terms-and-definitions-involving-aliens
Also, see:
http://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/sorry-the-accurate-legal-term-illegal-alien
It's weird that you feel the need to use the term 'Illegal Alien' while referencing a website that indicates the equivalency of 'Illegal' and 'Undocumented' while referencing the term.
Both websites specifically state "illegal alien" as a government term. If you read the comments prior to yours, you will see that I was responding to someone that didn't think humans could actually be illegal. So I linked to the government documentation that specifically defines "illegal alien" while mentioning "undocumented alien" as an alternative. If you look at my very first comment on the topic, you will see that the terminology I would like to go away is "undocumented immigrant." I guess, I'm not sure what is so difficult to understand about that or why I should even have to explain it. People having been posting some pretty minor things that they would like to see go away, and this is one of mine. You don't have to agree with it, despite the government definition.QuoteEven stranger given that your ancestry is not native and you are a multi-generational anchor baby who descended from illegal alien stock.
I'm a multi-generation American and legal through and through. Did you see me complain about anchor babies being considered illegal? They are actually considered citizens, as crazy as that might sound. Although, I don't see what that has to do with me posting about terminology I would like to see go away. Are you confused or trying to confuse others? Are you going to complain about any other posts here? I find it strange that you are singling me out.
(Emphasis is mine).
You're right...you can write any word/phrase you like...that's the point of this thread. Today especially is difficult because of the political atmosphere we're in and this morning's announcement to end DACA.
I would have said the same thing though if you had written something about epileptics or schizophrenics. Yes, we used to apply labels to people to dehumanize them. The politically correct terms these days are "people with epilepsy/schizophrenia". The point is to put the person first, and then the descriptor because no person is defined by only one trait. I do stand by my earlier statement though that people cannot be illegal, even though their status may be. You must understand that those government definitions were created by people who politicize issues. Surely you see that a person is not legal or illegal...their immigration status is. So rather than just fighting for what you want to call it, think about how you would feel if someone were to tell you that your entire existence were invalid, rather than that you crossed a border without permission.
*I'm sorry in advance if you don't like having to be "politically correct". That's just another way to say "sensitive to the subject you're talking about". There is nothing wrong with being sensitive to other people.
Post by: Leisured on September 06, 2017, 01:04:27 AM
Kick start, rather then start.
Is dependent on rather than depends on.
Post by: GuitarStv on September 06, 2017, 08:29:37 AM
Sorry if someone mentioned this; I didn't feel like scanning the whole thread.
I hate when someone says they or someone else "gave 110%/120%/150%/200%." It is literally impossible to give more than 100%. You cannot give more than you have. The ONLY people who are allowed to be described as giving MORE than 100% are those who died in the process...like a soldier or a first responder or something. Even giving 100% would result in passing out due to exhaustion or some other similar serious physical response. Therefore, I think the amount of effort that should be considered commendable is maybe 75-80%. I think this unfortunate trend can be traced to the rise in political correctness, participation trophies/awards, etc. Saying someone gave "110%" makes the person feel way better than saying they "tried really hard."
Rant over.
This depends.
With resource allocating typically 8 hours is 100% of a day. If someone is working 12 hour days for a week to get something done, he's actually giving 150% (from a resource allocation point of view). When people are working more than 100% it's an indication that hiring new people is necessary.
Post by: Kris on September 06, 2017, 09:27:49 AM
"Rachel and myself went to the park."
"He sent a gift to Rachel and myself."
Grr... I think it's because people feel that more syllables make them sound smarter.
Myself is a REFLEXIVE. You only use it when you're talking about something you do TO yourself. (I can hear the off-color jokes coming...)
Rachel and I went to the park. While I was there, I pushed MYSELF on the swing.
Post by: Paul der Krake on September 06, 2017, 09:35:41 AM
I get irritated when people misused "myself." Which they do all the time.YES
"Rachel and myself went to the park."
"He sent a gift to Rachel and myself."
Grr... I think it's because people feel that more syllables make them sound smarter.
Myself is a REFLEXIVE. You only use it when you're talking about something you do TO yourself. (I can hear the off-color jokes coming...)
Rachel and I went to the park. While I was there, I pushed MYSELF on the swing.
Post by: Tyson on September 06, 2017, 01:11:32 PM
No shit.
Post by: NoraLenderbee on September 06, 2017, 01:35:33 PM
I get irritated when people misused "myself." Which they do all the time.YES
"Rachel and myself went to the park."
"He sent a gift to Rachel and myself."
Grr... I think it's because people feel that more syllables make them sound smarter.
Myself is a REFLEXIVE. You only use it when you're talking about something you do TO yourself. (I can hear the off-color jokes coming...)
Rachel and I went to the park. While I was there, I pushed MYSELF on the swing.
Double YES. I think sometimes this comes from people trying to avoid using "me" for fear of making an error ("Him and me went to the park"). Other people do it to sound smart.
I know someone who would say, when she wanted your opinion about her clothes, "Does this look well?" instead of "Does this look good." She was trying to sound klassy. I finally told her it was not only wrong, it made her sound like an idiot (more politely). She doesn't say it around me any longer, but I'm not sure she's given it up completely.
Post by: Travis on September 07, 2017, 04:19:24 PM
I get irritated when people misuse "myself." Which they do all the time.
"Rachel and myself went to the park."
"He sent a gift to Rachel and myself."
Grr... I think it's because people feel that more syllables make them sound smarter.
Myself is a REFLEXIVE. You only use it when you're talking about something you do TO yourself. (I can hear the off-color jokes coming...)
Rachel and I went to the park. While I was there, I pushed MYSELF on the swing.
The rule I was taught with this one was this: if you can separate the two subjects into their own sentences and it is still correct, then that's what you use. For example, "He sent a gift to myself" is not correct, but "He sent a gift to me" is. The happens a lot with "The main subject of this sentence and me are off to do a random verb thing." You wouldn't say "Me am off to do a thing" you'd say "I am off to do a thing," therefore, "The main subject of this sentence and I are off to do a random verb thing" is correct.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on September 08, 2017, 07:00:30 AM
I know someone who would say, when she wanted your opinion about her clothes, "Does this look well?" instead of "Does this look good." She was trying to sound klassy.
Let's not jump to conclusions here. Is it possible she was inquiring about the acuity of her garments' eyesight?
Post by: Travis on September 08, 2017, 11:11:14 AM
I know someone who would say, when she wanted your opinion about her clothes, "Does this look well?" instead of "Does this look good." She was trying to sound klassy.
Let's not jump to conclusions here. Is it possible she was inquiring about the acuity of her garments' eyesight?
There has been a running gag in Game of Thrones where people keep confusing "less" and "fewer," much to stick-up-his-butt Stannis Baratheon's annoyance. After he died his right hand man picked up the mantle of policing that mistake.
Post by: NoraLenderbee on September 08, 2017, 11:19:17 AM
I know someone who would say, when she wanted your opinion about her clothes, "Does this look well?" instead of "Does this look good." She was trying to sound klassy.
Let's not jump to conclusions here. Is it possible she was inquiring about the acuity of her garments' eyesight?
Or their health?
Post by: GreenSheep on September 10, 2017, 03:16:35 PM
Also...
"Wow. Just wow." (At least half the time, these people go on to say more, so it's not "just" wow.)
"I know, right?"
Post by: Paul der Krake on September 10, 2017, 10:43:17 PM
ATM machine
VIN number
Post by: BlueHouse on September 11, 2017, 12:23:36 PM
Sorry if someone mentioned this; I didn't feel like scanning the whole thread.I agree 200%
I hate when someone says they or someone else "gave 110%/120%/150%/200%." It is literally impossible to give more than 100%. You cannot give more than you have. The ONLY people who are allowed to be described as giving MORE than 100% are those who died in the process...like a soldier or a first responder or something. Even giving 100% would result in passing out due to exhaustion or some other similar serious physical response. Therefore, I think the amount of effort that should be considered commendable is maybe 75-80%. I think this unfortunate trend can be traced to the rise in political correctness, participation trophies/awards, etc. Saying someone gave "110%" makes the person feel way better than saying they "tried really hard."
Rant over.
Post by: BlueHouse on September 11, 2017, 12:25:28 PM
I get irritated when people misuse "myself." Which they do all the time."...please call george or myself". I hate that too! How did that ever become so common?
"Rachel and myself went to the park."
"He sent a gift to Rachel and myself."
Grr... I think it's because people feel that more syllables make them sound smarter.
Myself is a REFLEXIVE. You only use it when you're talking about something you do TO yourself. (I can hear the off-color jokes coming...)
Rachel and I went to the park. While I was there, I pushed MYSELF on the swing.
I also hate when I can hear the "t" in often.
Post by: marielle on September 11, 2017, 12:27:24 PM
I also hate when I can hear the "t" in often.
Wait, really? Isn't that just how you say it?
Post by: Kris on September 11, 2017, 12:34:13 PM
I get irritated when people misuse "myself." Which they do all the time."...please call george or myself". I hate that too! How did that ever become so common?
"Rachel and myself went to the park."
"He sent a gift to Rachel and myself."
Grr... I think it's because people feel that more syllables make them sound smarter.
Myself is a REFLEXIVE. You only use it when you're talking about something you do TO yourself. (I can hear the off-color jokes coming...)
Rachel and I went to the park. While I was there, I pushed MYSELF on the swing.
I also hate when I can hear the "t" in often.
That's always irritated me, too, though it's an "acceptable" pronunciation. Whenever someone I'm talking to pronounces the "T," I get distracted by it and basically don't hear the rest of their sentence because my brain has seized up at the word "often," lol.
Post by: Travis on September 11, 2017, 01:29:03 PM
PIN number
ATM machine
VIN number
I get why some folks might be bothered by this, but in my line of work we eat, drink, and breath acronyms. Some of them are so similar that sometimes they need to have something to distinguish them. I have a personal beef with this as well. I met a colonel in Iraq a couple years ago who decided to be a jerk about this. I asked her "We need to [coordinate some military stuff] our ABCS systems (Army Battle Command Systems)." She then lectured me for five minutes why I was being redundant and incorrect, and by the end of her lecture never actually answered my original question.
Post by: BlueHouse on September 11, 2017, 01:54:11 PM
I also hate when I can hear the "t" in often.
Wait, really? Isn't that just how you say it?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/correct-pronunciation-of-often
Post by: soccerluvof4 on September 11, 2017, 02:13:58 PM
Post by: marielle on September 11, 2017, 02:16:13 PM
I also hate when I can hear the "t" in often.
Wait, really? Isn't that just how you say it?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/correct-pronunciation-of-often
Maybe it has something to do with English not being my first language. (Or even second, if a language I forgot counts)
Not really something I can change at this point. "Offen" just sounds...wrong.
Post by: GreenSheep on September 11, 2017, 02:32:11 PM
(No, I don't think the preposition thing should be a hard and fast rule. I'm familiar with Winston Churchill's "That is a stupid rule, up with which I shall not put," but why re-create a perfectly good sentence to break a rule?!)
Also, +1 for unique being a word that is not modifiable. Something either is or is not unique.
Post by: Miss Piggy on September 11, 2017, 03:32:46 PM
DH
DW
DS
DD
But for some reason, I'm totally okay with FIL and MIL. I think it's the "Dear" part of the previous list that really bugs me.
Also sick of "hella."
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on September 11, 2017, 08:58:45 PM
I'm sick of stupid-ass internet abbreviations:
DH
DW
DS
DD
But for some reason, I'm totally okay with FIL and MIL. I think it's the "Dear" part of the previous list that really bugs me.
Also sick of "hella."
Yes!
I never use DH, but do use FiL, MiL, BiL.
How do you feel about SO? I don't object to it as strongly as DH/DH, but still think that partner suffices.
(Are we about to be blacklisted by darling militants?)
Oh, I also object to the premature promotion a boyfriend/girlfriend to 'partner'.
You're 22, not living together and you've been dating for five weeks!
Post by: GuitarStv on September 12, 2017, 07:44:48 AM
PIN number
ATM machine
VIN number
I get why some folks might be bothered by this, but in my line of work we eat, drink, and breath acronyms. Some of them are so similar that sometimes they need to have something to distinguish them. I have a personal beef with this as well. I met a colonel in Iraq a couple years ago who decided to be a jerk about this. I asked her "We need to [coordinate some military stuff] our ABCS systems (Army Battle Command Systems)." She then lectured me for five minutes why I was being redundant and incorrect, and by the end of her lecture never actually answered my original question.
If it was spoken as described, she may not have answered your original question because there was no question asked. :P
Post by: Travis on September 12, 2017, 08:15:35 AM
PIN number
ATM machine
VIN number
I get why some folks might be bothered by this, but in my line of work we eat, drink, and breath acronyms. Some of them are so similar that sometimes they need to have something to distinguish them. I have a personal beef with this as well. I met a colonel in Iraq a couple years ago who decided to be a jerk about this. I asked her "We need to [coordinate some military stuff] our ABCS systems (Army Battle Command Systems)." She then lectured me for five minutes why I was being redundant and incorrect, and by the end of her lecture never actually answered my original question.
If it was spoken as described, she may not have answered your original question because there was no question asked. :P
Well, after working with her for a few weeks and learning her level of competence it wouldn't have made much difference.
Post by: ncornilsen on September 12, 2017, 02:17:27 PM
I'm sick of stupid-ass internet abbreviations:
DH
DW
DS
DD
But for some reason, I'm totally okay with FIL and MIL. I think it's the "Dear" part of the previous list that really bugs me.
Also sick of "hella."
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/36/bf/ea/36bfea67e397921b010e75ea7b89c920.gif)
Post by: calimom on September 12, 2017, 11:00:49 PM
I'm sick of stupid-ass internet abbreviations:
DH
DW
DS
DD
I hear you, but have to say I do like the straightforwardness of DH/DW/DS/DD, etc. I'll take that any day over the internet adorableness of things like "The FrugalTimbersFamily!" Mrs. FrugalTimbers. BabyTimbers. TheTimbersHound. And so on. College educated adults coming up with monikers like these. My disdain of such things probably started from reading a blog years ago when the author nicknamed her offspring Rock and HardPlace. Please.
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on September 13, 2017, 05:25:06 AM
I'm sick of stupid-ass internet abbreviations:
DH
DW
DS
DD
I hear you, but have to say I do like the straightforwardness of DH/DW/DS/DD, etc. I'll take that any day over the internet adorableness of things like "The FrugalTimbersFamily!" Mrs. FrugalTimbers. BabyTimbers. TheTimbersHound. And so on. College educated adults coming up with monikers like these. My disdain of such things probably started from reading a blog years ago when the author nicknamed her offspring Rock and HardPlace. Please.
Yeah, those are twee as fuck.
Thank goodness there is another option apart from those and the D-suite.
When I refer to my husband on here, I say "my husband". Fairly straightforward but I think it could catch on.
Post by: dougules on September 13, 2017, 11:19:13 AM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on September 13, 2017, 02:15:45 PM
I agree that the term "adult" as a verb is annoying, especially the way I see a lot of people use it on social media, but it *is* a handy alternative to "put on my big boy underwear and acted like a responsible adult, even though it's hard."
Post by: hoosier on September 13, 2017, 02:27:40 PM
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on September 13, 2017, 04:49:16 PM
Depending on your current point of view, the 'D' could stand for positive or negative descriptors: "dear", "darling", "darn" "(edited)", etc.
... dickhead.
Post by: Dicey on September 15, 2017, 09:26:50 AM
I gotta disagree on DH, DW, DS, DD--I think they're handy shortcuts. Depending on your current point of view, the 'D' could stand for positive or negative descriptors: "dear", "darling", "darn" "(edited)", etc.
... dickhead.
I'm in the fan club for these acronyms. I would never say them aloud, but they're quite handy in my forum writing.
I never use DH, but do use FiL, MiL, BiL.
And I, in turn, hate MiL, BiL, etc. with the lower case "i". It's harder to type and twee as fuck. Use all caps, please. It's an acronym, FFS.
Post by: Miss Piggy on September 15, 2017, 09:29:04 AM
It's harder to type and twee as fuck.
Twee. That's been said a couple of times in this thread, but I've never seen it before. I'll have to look that one up, but I suspect it'll end on on my "list of words I wish would go away." :)
Post by: ketchup on September 15, 2017, 09:51:16 AM
I'm definitely also opposed to DH/DW/etc, but not passionately so. I don't mind SO or MIL/FIL/MIL. Wifey and hubby make my skin crawl (wifey is worse for some reason).I'm sick of stupid-ass internet abbreviations:
DH
DW
DS
DD
But for some reason, I'm totally okay with FIL and MIL. I think it's the "Dear" part of the previous list that really bugs me.
Also sick of "hella."
Yes!
I never use DH, but do use FiL, MiL, BiL.
How do you feel about SO? I don't object to it as strongly as DH/DH, but still think that partner suffices.
(Are we about to be blacklisted by darling militants?)
Oh, I also object to the premature promotion a boyfriend/girlfriend to 'partner'.
You're 22, not living together and you've been dating for five weeks!
"Partner" definitely shouldn't be applied too soon, but it can definitely be a boyfriend/girlfriend. My girlfriend is my "partner" and we've been together for six years (I'm 26 and she's 25) and living together for five (and own two houses together, with our first paid-off and turned into a rental).
"Adulting" makes me think the person is anything but adult if doing something that responsible adults do is considered out of the ordinary enough to be noteworthy.
Post by: ketchup on September 15, 2017, 11:06:46 AM
I could understand an 18-year-old being "proud" of "adulting" but I tend to see the term used by those in their 20s and 30s... you know, actual full-time should-be adults."Adulting" makes me think the person is anything but adult if doing something that responsible adults do is considered out of the ordinary enough to be noteworthy.
I think that's the point, linguistically. Using it as a verb indicates that you are acting as an adult in a specific situation, even if you feel you're not embodying the term in your life overall.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on September 15, 2017, 11:33:51 AM
I could understand an 18-year-old being "proud" of "adulting" but I tend to see the term used by those in their 20s and 30s... you know, actual full-time should-be adults."Adulting" makes me think the person is anything but adult if doing something that responsible adults do is considered out of the ordinary enough to be noteworthy.
I think that's the point, linguistically. Using it as a verb indicates that you are acting as an adult in a specific situation, even if you feel you're not embodying the term in your life overall.
And then there is my age group. We are so tired of being adults, we just want to have fun and be irresponsible (and not have to cook dinner again), so there are times we use "adulting" ironically. Forget second childhood, I want a second teenagerhood, I was much too responsible the first time around.
Post by: Paul der Krake on September 15, 2017, 12:37:59 PM
Post by: daverobev on September 21, 2017, 10:55:00 AM
I also hate when I can hear the "t" in often.
Wait, really? Isn't that just how you say it?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/correct-pronunciation-of-often
Weird. I say often with the 't', and hasten as well. I would say that most in the South East of the UK would pronounce the 't'.
I'm racking my brain for the rest of the UK. I've basically lost my firm footing on pronunciation from home now - I have to think whether I would say 'kilo-meter' or 'kilometter', now (the former, I believe).
Post by: RetiredAt63 on September 21, 2017, 11:12:08 AM
Weird. I say often with the 't', and hasten as well. I would say that most in the South East of the UK would pronounce the 't'.
I'm racking my brain for the rest of the UK. I've basically lost my firm footing on pronunciation from home now - I have to think whether I would say 'kilo-meter' or 'kilometter', now (the former, I believe).
You'll start sounding like a Canadian one of these decades. ;-)
Post by: Not Your Monkey on September 21, 2017, 11:20:49 AM
Post by: daverobev on September 21, 2017, 02:04:29 PM
Weird. I say often with the 't', and hasten as well. I would say that most in the South East of the UK would pronounce the 't'.
I'm racking my brain for the rest of the UK. I've basically lost my firm footing on pronunciation from home now - I have to think whether I would say 'kilo-meter' or 'kilometter', now (the former, I believe).
You'll start sounding like a Canadian one of these decades. ;-)
Ha... maybe. Not this decade though. I refuse to call petrol "gas" when it is *clearly* a liquid :P
Post by: BoonDogle on September 21, 2017, 03:12:52 PM
"+1000"
Almost like a competition to see who can add the most zeros. I get it. You strongly agree. "+1" or "agreed" works.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on September 21, 2017, 05:40:03 PM
Weird. I say often with the 't', and hasten as well. I would say that most in the South East of the UK would pronounce the 't'.
I'm racking my brain for the rest of the UK. I've basically lost my firm footing on pronunciation from home now - I have to think whether I would say 'kilo-meter' or 'kilometter', now (the former, I believe).
You'll start sounding like a Canadian one of these decades. ;-)
Ha... maybe. Not this decade though. I refuse to call petrol "gas" when it is *clearly* a liquid :P
Well that is just us being lazy - it is gasoline. You know, gasoline, benzene, kerosene, . . . . At least doughnuts (at Tim's) are still doughnuts, not donuts.
Post by: Travis on September 21, 2017, 08:43:39 PM
Weird. I say often with the 't', and hasten as well. I would say that most in the South East of the UK would pronounce the 't'.
I'm racking my brain for the rest of the UK. I've basically lost my firm footing on pronunciation from home now - I have to think whether I would say 'kilo-meter' or 'kilometter', now (the former, I believe).
You'll start sounding like a Canadian one of these decades. ;-)
Ha... maybe. Not this decade though. I refuse to call petrol "gas" when it is *clearly* a liquid :P
Well that is just us being lazy - it is gasoline. You know, gasoline, benzene, kerosene, . . . . At least doughnuts (at Tim's) are still doughnuts, not donuts.
But not gasolene?
Post by: Cwadda on September 22, 2017, 07:52:35 AM
Any sentence that begins with "As a" to mean when someone identifies with a particular subject.
"As a college student who earns minimum wage..."
"As a public service worker...."
"As a recent homeowner...."
This is becoming just so overused. Like you HAVE to bring your own personal experience to have an opinion about something?
Post by: solon on September 22, 2017, 09:40:39 AM
Another phrase I recently found out makes me angry
Any sentence that begins with "As a" to mean when someone identifies with a particular subject.
"As a college student who earns minimum wage..."
"As a public service worker...."
"As a recent homeowner...."
This is becoming just so overused. Like you HAVE to bring your own personal experience to have an opinion about something?
You wouldn't make it very far as an agile developer. We use that phrase all the time in our user stories.
Post by: GuitarStv on September 22, 2017, 09:58:15 AM
Weird. I say often with the 't', and hasten as well. I would say that most in the South East of the UK would pronounce the 't'.
I'm racking my brain for the rest of the UK. I've basically lost my firm footing on pronunciation from home now - I have to think whether I would say 'kilo-meter' or 'kilometter', now (the former, I believe).
You'll start sounding like a Canadian one of these decades. ;-)
Ha... maybe. Not this decade though. I refuse to call petrol "gas" when it is *clearly* a liquid :P
Well that is just us being lazy - it is gasoline. You know, gasoline, benzene, kerosene, . . . . At least doughnuts (at Tim's) are still doughnuts, not donuts.
But not gasolene?
No. That would be silly.
Post by: Tyson on September 22, 2017, 10:24:16 AM
Grrr.
Post by: littleweedontheprairie on September 23, 2017, 01:35:03 PM
"Breeders" when referring to people having children. Often used by people treating their animals with inordinate amounts of attention. In the same category: pet owners who refer themselves as "parents" and call their pets their "babies/children".
"Truly blessed", and I am actually religious but I really cannot stand that one. It seems to be used mostly as a humblebragging tool for social media in Christian circles. " We live in such a big house that I can't keep up with the cleaning, but thankfully my children are so helpful! Of course it helps that I can stay home to teach them right! Truly blessed to have a husband who provides for our family!" ... yuck.
"Clean food", "clean eating" - really you just mean "cooked from scratch. Also "farm grown" whatever - there is no such thing as factory grown vegetables or meat. I promise, it all comes from a farm!
This is a fun thread. Thanks for starting it!
Post by: Dave1442397 on September 23, 2017, 01:48:37 PM
Post by: GuitarStv on September 23, 2017, 02:34:46 PM
"Clean food", "clean eating" - really you just mean "cooked from scratch.
I've always taken clean eating to mean no garbage and lots of veggies. I can cook a mean grilled cheese or breaded fish n' chips from scratch but wouldn't say either is an example of clean eating. :P
Post by: Paul der Krake on September 23, 2017, 02:42:49 PM
Post by: Travis on September 23, 2017, 08:42:59 PM
"Clean food", "clean eating" - really you just mean "cooked from scratch.
I've always taken clean eating to mean no garbage and lots of veggies. I can cook a mean grilled cheese or breaded fish n' chips from scratch but wouldn't say either is an example of clean eating. :P
I always see "eating clean" in the same discussions as cross-fit and "paleo" dieting, but I haven't found a good definition of what "clean" food is.
Post by: Free Spirit on September 23, 2017, 08:53:54 PM
[person ordering food] "I'll do the steak and baked potato, then for dessert I'll do the apple pie."
I want to say, please describe to us in great detail exactly how you're going to "do" those foods... ;p
Post by: littleweedontheprairie on September 23, 2017, 09:43:18 PM
Post by: calimom on September 23, 2017, 11:12:19 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=babB7_WJZQw
Post by: Poundwise on September 26, 2017, 03:08:50 PM
In the same category: pet owners who refer themselves as "parents" and call their pets their "babies/children".On target!
"Truly blessed", and I am actually religious but I really cannot stand that one. It seems to be used mostly as a humblebragging tool for social media in Christian circles. " We live in such a big house that I can't keep up with the cleaning, but thankfully my children are so helpful! Of course it helps that I can stay home to teach them right! Truly blessed to have a husband who provides for our family!" ... yuck.
Has anybody mentioned "furbabies"? I know that many people love their pets more than their children or other people's children, but still...
"Hero" is a word that I used to like because it referred to a person who had shown great, unusual, bravery in accomplishing a selfless and significant goal. Now it is used on the most trivial occasions.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on September 26, 2017, 03:47:05 PM
Has anybody mentioned "furbabies"? I know that many people love their pets more than their children or other people's children, but still...I think the "fur baby" thing has come about thanks to pet stores in malls that sell $1000 <insert today's breed fad> puppies. It's a super smart business idea--the target market is right there.
Sadly, I know a family that bought two of those puppies. Spent $4k by the time they had all the shots/supplies/gear/etc. They're a year into it, and regret their decision. But now they're stuck for the next 10+ years.
Post by: dividendman on September 26, 2017, 07:41:27 PM
Post by: dividendman on September 26, 2017, 08:45:33 PM
2.0. 3.0.
No, it's just 2, or 3. 2.1? Sure. 2.174? Ok. 2.0000000000? No. You don't need to (always, every time) say "two point oh!".
Perhaps they wish to convey the precision of the result i.e. 2 is less precise than 2.0 (or more properly 2.0 x 10^0).
Post by: GuitarStv on September 27, 2017, 07:42:31 AM
2.0. 3.0.
No, it's just 2, or 3. 2.1? Sure. 2.174? Ok. 2.0000000000? No. You don't need to (always, every time) say "two point oh!".
Perhaps they wish to convey the precision of the result i.e. 2 is less precise than 2.0 (or more properly 2.0 x 10^0).
Or in the case of software to indicate that it's not really done, and you should be expecting a 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4 beta shortly.
Post by: ketchup on September 27, 2017, 08:26:52 AM
I'm more a fan of keeping my software at 0.9.x for multiple years until management has figured out that the numbers my program spits out are not magic and actually have to be determined in some way.2.0. 3.0.
No, it's just 2, or 3. 2.1? Sure. 2.174? Ok. 2.0000000000? No. You don't need to (always, every time) say "two point oh!".
Perhaps they wish to convey the precision of the result i.e. 2 is less precise than 2.0 (or more properly 2.0 x 10^0).
Or in the case of software to indicate that it's not really done, and you should be expecting a 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4 beta shortly.
Post by: chaskavitch on October 09, 2017, 08:03:31 AM
I heard one yesterday that gets under my skin. It makes me cringe when people talk about "DNA" for something that's not biological. I guess it's in their corporate DNA to latch on to the latest buzzwords.
Oh, thank you. I did a lot of bacterial/viral genetic work in college, and this really bothers me too. Every time I hear it, my inner Inigo Montoya says, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 09, 2017, 08:26:53 AM
I heard one yesterday that gets under my skin. It makes me cringe when people talk about "DNA" for something that's not biological. I guess it's in their corporate DNA to latch on to the latest buzzwords.
Oh, thank you. I did a lot of bacterial/viral genetic work in college, and this really bothers me too. Every time I hear it, my inner Inigo Montoya says, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Yes thank you. DNA = deoxyribose nucleic acid, and no I did not have to Google it.
Post by: Laura33 on October 09, 2017, 09:02:31 AM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 09, 2017, 09:08:15 AM
"Would of." I've seen it here a number of times, and it just makes my teeth hurt.
Words that we slur while talking don't really need to be spelled that way - "I'm gonna", etc. "Would of" would be OK as "would've", because it is "would have". But typed out "would of", ugh.
Post by: Kris on October 09, 2017, 09:09:07 AM
"Would of." I've seen it here a number of times, and it just makes my teeth hurt.
Oh, man, I hate that.
Makes me think of something that a (former*) Facebook friend used to write all the time that was mind-bogglingly worse:
"kindave."
As in, "I'm kindave tired right now."
*"Former," because she, a Trump supporter because of her environment, unfriended me. Why? Because her abusive shitpile of a husband (literally physically abusive) would go through her Facebook profile and make her unfriend anyone he didn't approve of.
Post by: daverobev on October 09, 2017, 12:48:01 PM
I heard one yesterday that gets under my skin. It makes me cringe when people talk about "DNA" for something that's not biological. I guess it's in their corporate DNA to latch on to the latest buzzwords.
Oh, thank you. I did a lot of bacterial/viral genetic work in college, and this really bothers me too. Every time I hear it, my inner Inigo Montoya says, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Yes thank you. DNA = deoxyribose nucleic acid, and no I did not have to Google it.
Deoxyribonucleic acid.
Should've checked in a search engine of your choice. Har.
Post by: GreenSheep on October 09, 2017, 12:55:21 PM
Post by: Free Spirit on October 09, 2017, 01:20:43 PM
I heard one yesterday that gets under my skin. It makes me cringe when people talk about "DNA" for something that's not biological. I guess it's in their corporate DNA to latch on to the latest buzzwords.
Oh, thank you. I did a lot of bacterial/viral genetic work in college, and this really bothers me too. Every time I hear it, my inner Inigo Montoya says, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Yes thank you. DNA = deoxyribose nucleic acid, and no I did not have to Google it.
Deoxyribonucleic acid.
Should've checked in a search engine of your choice. Har.
I believe you are both correct. In the first paper (1953) it is referred to as "Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid" but in subsequent papers it is written as "Deoxyribonucleic Acid".
http://www.nature.com/nature/dna50/archive.html?foxtrotcallback=true
Post by: daverobev on October 09, 2017, 01:25:05 PM
I heard one yesterday that gets under my skin. It makes me cringe when people talk about "DNA" for something that's not biological. I guess it's in their corporate DNA to latch on to the latest buzzwords.
Oh, thank you. I did a lot of bacterial/viral genetic work in college, and this really bothers me too. Every time I hear it, my inner Inigo Montoya says, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Yes thank you. DNA = deoxyribose nucleic acid, and no I did not have to Google it.
Deoxyribonucleic acid.
Should've checked in a search engine of your choice. Har.
I believe you are both correct. In the first paper (1953) it is referred to as "Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid" but in subsequent papers it is written as "Deoxyribonucleic Acid".
http://www.nature.com/nature/dna50/archive.html?foxtrotcallback=true
Huh, well, every day you learn something new isn't a day wasted, right? I stand (sit) corrected.
Post by: Step37 on October 09, 2017, 01:25:55 PM
It makes my skin crawl when grown adults say this instead of sandwich. It sounds like baby talk and I want to yell, “it’s a fucking SANDWICH,” but I don’t because that would be crazy. Inside voice only...
Post by: Acastus on October 10, 2017, 11:38:38 AM
Sub in
* I don't have time to fix it.
* I don't have to use it, so I don't care.
* We are stuck with it.
Post by: Step37 on October 10, 2017, 04:44:15 PM
Yes! And also when the waiter/waitress feels compelled to comment on what the customer ended up "doing" with their order: "oh, you did a great job on that"; or worse: "are we still working on that?", like a nurse asking about a bowel movememt...
THIS! “We” instead of “you”.
“And how are we doing today?” I don’t know about you, but I want to punch you in the throat...
Post by: calimom on October 10, 2017, 04:57:25 PM
Hint: they don't
Post by: MrsStubble on October 10, 2017, 07:09:56 PM
I hate hearing people say that word at work. "what's the functionality of this feature?"
The function of something is its function.
Post by: Miss Piggy on October 10, 2017, 07:19:53 PM
Functionality
I hate hearing people say that word at work. "what's the functionality of this feature?"
The function of something is its function.
OMG, yes!
Post by: paddedhat on October 11, 2017, 05:53:46 PM
I'd like to add "needs <done>" where people miss out the "to be" part, e.g. a car needs moved / this needs done by Friday / the room needs cleaned.
On a related note, I'll add "because <reason>" where people leave out the "of." For example, "I need to move my car because hailstorm." Or, "Our kitchen is in a shambles because remodeling."
The first example might be a regional thing. West Virginia/Pennsylvania and perhaps other places. I agree, it sounds odd.
Second example is because hipster-speak. Or because irony.
Yes, I suspect the "needs washed" etc. construction might be regional. My husband used this and didn't realize it was incorrect until he was an adult in graduate school...years later, he still sometimes pauses and self-checks his grammar to see that he's constructing the sentence correctly. I'm not sure if he picked it up from family or from the Pacific NW region where he grew up. However, the only other person I've heard regularly using it (a podcaster) was also from the PNW, so...
The first example is definitely a Pennsylvania thing, and it may have come from Pennsylvania Dutch. The second one I've never heard of.
Damn Dougules, you amaze me. I was raised by a Pa. Dutch step father. His parents had him as a very late in life Catholic accident. By the time I met them they looked about old enough to be God's parents. His parents only spoke Pa. Dutch in the house and his mom only read it, and not English. As I was reading this post I knew exactly where it came from, but certainly didn't expect to have an Alabama resident confirm it. English speakers from a Pa. Dutch background can be really tough to understand. Early in my home building career I had a lot of older "dutchy" subcontractors. When they called the house, my wife would ask them to hold on, and hand me the phone. They were speaking English, sort of, but the wife had no clue as to what they were saying. Being raised with it, I never missed a single crazy word of their fast speech and jumbled sentence structure, but God help you if it was your first time trying to talk with a dutchy.
One I never forget happened when a buddy of mine bought a farm field, deep in Pa. Dutch country. One day he got a call from a local farmer. The guy identified himself by his last name only. He then said, "do you want me to come make your fields off?" My buddy asked him what he was saying. The farmer repeated the same thing again. My buddy politely tells him that he still doesn't understand. The farmer then lets out an "Achk" which is a dutchy grunt of frustration, and says, while talking out loud to himself, "how do I say it in English?" he then says, "would you like me to come and cut your grass"
Post by: paddedhat on October 11, 2017, 06:02:25 PM
Post by: Travis on October 11, 2017, 07:17:47 PM
Here is one that I don't understand in that it appears to be a relatively new trend, at least to my ears. I only hear it from females, and they look and/or sound to be in the under 30 YO group. It involves a pronunciation tic that takes a multi-syllable word ending in N and dropping the last syllable, replacing it with a hard N. Example would be Mountain, or certain. I don't know if it's regional or trendy, but it irritates the hell out of me.
So skipping the "ai" or accentuating the "n?"
Mountn or MountaiN?
Post by: paddedhat on October 11, 2017, 07:30:03 PM
Post by: pbkmaine on October 11, 2017, 07:42:09 PM
No, more like skipping the ai, and going for a soft n. My wife thinks it's sort of sounds like ending the word, by cutting it short and wrapping it up with with an odd, soft grunt.
It’s a glottal stop:
http://www.linguisticsnetwork.com/a-closer-look-at-flaps-and-glottal-stops-in-standard-american-english/
Post by: Travis on October 11, 2017, 07:47:46 PM
No, more like skipping the ai, and going for a soft n. My wife thinks it's sort of sounds like ending the word, by cutting it short and wrapping it up with with an odd, soft grunt.
It’s a glottal stop:
http://www.linguisticsnetwork.com/a-closer-look-at-flaps-and-glottal-stops-in-standard-american-english/
I see that in the Army. Sergeant gets pronounced "Sarnt" quite often. It seems to be a combination of regional dialect and rushed/lazy speech.
Post by: paddedhat on October 11, 2017, 08:27:43 PM
No, more like skipping the ai, and going for a soft n. My wife thinks it's sort of sounds like ending the word, by cutting it short and wrapping it up with with an odd, soft grunt.
It’s a glottal stop:
http://www.linguisticsnetwork.com/a-closer-look-at-flaps-and-glottal-stops-in-standard-american-english/
I know I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but FFS, that could of been posted in Russian, and it would be just as useful to me, LOL.
Post by: pbkmaine on October 12, 2017, 01:14:55 AM
Post by: dougules on October 16, 2017, 11:27:08 AM
I'd like to add "needs <done>" where people miss out the "to be" part, e.g. a car needs moved / this needs done by Friday / the room needs cleaned.
On a related note, I'll add "because <reason>" where people leave out the "of." For example, "I need to move my car because hailstorm." Or, "Our kitchen is in a shambles because remodeling."
The first example might be a regional thing. West Virginia/Pennsylvania and perhaps other places. I agree, it sounds odd.
Second example is because hipster-speak. Or because irony.
Yes, I suspect the "needs washed" etc. construction might be regional. My husband used this and didn't realize it was incorrect until he was an adult in graduate school...years later, he still sometimes pauses and self-checks his grammar to see that he's constructing the sentence correctly. I'm not sure if he picked it up from family or from the Pacific NW region where he grew up. However, the only other person I've heard regularly using it (a podcaster) was also from the PNW, so...
The first example is definitely a Pennsylvania thing, and it may have come from Pennsylvania Dutch. The second one I've never heard of.
Damn Dougules, you amaze me. I was raised by a Pa. Dutch step father. His parents had him as a very late in life Catholic accident. By the time I met them they looked about old enough to be God's parents. His parents only spoke Pa. Dutch in the house and his mom only read it, and not English. As I was reading this post I knew exactly where it came from, but certainly didn't expect to have an Alabama resident confirm it. English speakers from a Pa. Dutch background can be really tough to understand. Early in my home building career I had a lot of older "dutchy" subcontractors. When they called the house, my wife would ask them to hold on, and hand me the phone. They were speaking English, sort of, but the wife had no clue as to what they were saying. Being raised with it, I never missed a single crazy word of their fast speech and jumbled sentence structure, but God help you if it was your first time trying to talk with a dutchy.
One I never forget happened when a buddy of mine bought a farm field, deep in Pa. Dutch country. One day he got a call from a local farmer. The guy identified himself by his last name only. He then said, "do you want me to come make your fields off?" My buddy asked him what he was saying. The farmer repeated the same thing again. My buddy politely tells him that he still doesn't understand. The farmer then lets out an "Achk" which is a dutchy grunt of frustration, and says, while talking out loud to himself, "how do I say it in English?" he then says, "would you like me to come and cut your grass"
DH (haha) is from Pa. Dutch country, so he will point out "Dutchy" things people say there. I was told by a lady in his home town that English was the second language for most folks in the area 100 years ago.
DH's family is from Western Pa., though, so I occasionally get confused on which things are "Dutchy" and which things are Pittsburghese. Throw in Alabamanese, and it gets crazy.
On top of that, I was raised Mormon, so I instantly recognized the moun'ain glottal stop that's also in this thread as a Utah thing. They have their own set of weird regionalisms, but what is funny is that they don't realize they have their own accent.
Post by: Louisville on October 16, 2017, 11:43:20 AM
Post by: GreenSheep on October 16, 2017, 02:12:34 PM
"Where's your smile today?" "Did you forget your smile?" "C'mon, smile!" (I'm not generally a frowny or unpleasant person, but no one smiles 24/7. It seems like anytime a stranger (always male) catches me NOT smiling, one of these tired phrases is trotted out. I actually asked a TSA security officer once if he ever asks men that question. Airport security seemed like an odd place to expect everyone to be grinning anyway.)
Post by: dougules on October 17, 2017, 11:17:58 AM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 17, 2017, 05:31:09 PM
Another one that bothers me is when Canadians say "North America" when you can tell they're not trying to include Mexico.
Since North America includes a lot more land south of Mexico (exactly how far seems to depend on where Central America is considered to start), maybe they are shortening it from "parts of North America that speak mostly English"? I say mostly to allow for the large amount of French and Spanish spoken in various places.
I suppose this goes along with the USians who call themselves Americans, without including everyone else from Chile to Canada. And yes, I realise the full name of the country lends itself to this.
Post by: dougules on October 17, 2017, 07:07:17 PM
Another one that bothers me is when Canadians say "North America" when you can tell they're not trying to include Mexico.
Since North America includes a lot more land south of Mexico (exactly how far seems to depend on where Central America is considered to start), maybe they are shortening it from "parts of North America that speak mostly English"? I say mostly to allow for the large amount of French and Spanish spoken in various places.
I suppose this goes along with the USians who call themselves Americans, without including everyone else from Chile to Canada. And yes, I realise the full name of the country lends itself to this.
You're right about using "Americans." I personally actually generally go out of my way to rephrase so I don't call myself American to non-US people from the Americas. In Spanish I always use "estadounidense." And it's just as bad for Canadians to use "North Americans" if they don't include Mexicans and maybe Nicaraguans and Cubans, too.
Post by: marble_faun on October 17, 2017, 08:58:06 PM
If speakers of other languages want to use "American" to mean other things, they are free to, but it frankly the boat has sailed as far as English is concerned.
"USian" just looks and sounds awful. That would be one of my own Words/Phrases I Wish Would Go Away!
Post by: Paul der Krake on October 17, 2017, 09:36:44 PM
Notable exception: the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) does include Mexico.
Language is full of shortcuts and approximations. When asked my weight by a medical professional, I don't answer in Newtons or school them on the technically proper physical terms (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_versus_weight).
Post by: ketchup on October 18, 2017, 09:53:28 AM
"USian" just looks and sounds awful. That would be one of my own Words/Phrases I Wish Would Go Away!
In Spanish I always use "estadounidense."Estadounidense means United-States-ian, but in a way that doesn't sound awful (we need an English equivalent). :)
Post by: dougules on October 18, 2017, 11:09:07 AM
Before the United States of America became the USA, the British referred to the area as the American colonies. Things from there came to be known as American.
If speakers of other languages want to use "American" to mean other things, they are free to, but it frankly the boat has sailed as far as English is concerned.
"USian" just looks and sounds awful. That would be one of my own Words/Phrases I Wish Would Go Away!
Amerigo Vespucci was an Italian who was employed by the Spanish.
North America usually denotes just the US and Canada because they are the large , hyper developed, culturally homogeneous block. Not what technically constitutes the geographical continent that also includes Guatemala and Honduras. I mean, when you read of an international corporation looking to expand to North America, it's understood that they really just want a phone number with a +1 dialing code.
Notable exception: the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) does include Mexico.
Language is full of shortcuts and approximations. When asked my weight by a medical professional, I don't answer in Newtons or school them on the technically proper physical terms (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_versus_weight).
In general I would agree about shortcuts and approximations, but it's grating when it's a subtle put-down to our neighbors to the south. Why not just say "The US and Canada?" It's only two more syllables.
And I'd like to know if we could get any Quebecois to chime in about whether they're part of a culturally homogenous block with Anglo-North America.
Post by: dougules on October 18, 2017, 11:12:09 AM
"USian" just looks and sounds awful. That would be one of my own Words/Phrases I Wish Would Go Away!In Spanish I always use "estadounidense."Estadounidense means United-States-ian, but in a way that doesn't sound awful (we need an English equivalent). :)
Yes, we do.
Post by: ZiziPB on October 18, 2017, 11:33:55 AM
Post by: ponyboy on October 18, 2017, 12:58:53 PM
Another hip word to say now is "RIGHT." That replaced the "really" word above. Again...used as some sort of matter of fact statement/one word sentence crap.
Why are people so retarded?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 18, 2017, 05:39:31 PM
And I'd like to know if we could get any Quebecois to chime in about whether they're part of a culturally homogenous block with Anglo-North America.
Snort. ;-)
A lot of English Canadians would disagree too. Especially when it comes to religion, politics and guns.
Post by: FrugalSaver on October 18, 2017, 09:30:28 PM
"I could care less"
NO. THINK ABOUT IT.
I know, right?
I know r..
Oh. Sorry.
Post by: Dicey on October 19, 2017, 12:49:41 AM
Why are people so retarded?Sorry ponyboy, that is one expression that needs to go away completely. Please, just stop using it.
Post by: Cache_Stash on October 19, 2017, 05:33:07 AM
Why are people so retarded?Sorry ponyboy, that is one expression that needs to go away completely. Please, just stop using it.
The term is now minimally exceptional.
Post by: ponyboy on October 19, 2017, 08:33:09 AM
Post by: Laura33 on October 19, 2017, 09:08:00 AM
The word "REALLY" seems to have vanished for the most part. Its no longer used as a one word sentence. YOu know what I mean...when the word "really" is used in disgust. Like if you do something stupid and someone goes..."REALLY!?"
Another hip word to say now is "RIGHT." That replaced the "really" word above. Again...used as some sort of matter of fact statement/one word sentence crap.
Why are people so retarded?
I blame Bill Cosby. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bputeFGXEjA
Post by: Kris on October 19, 2017, 09:27:34 AM
No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.
I imagine you're fond of the N word, too?
Post by: Freckles on October 19, 2017, 09:47:00 AM
No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.
"Snowflakes" as applied to people.
Post by: ponyboy on October 19, 2017, 11:15:06 AM
No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.
I imagine you're fond of the N word, too?
I dont use it daily but theres no reason it should be banished. Its not illegal to say words. If anyone says that now and is on camera its pretty much a death sentence in terms of career, public image, etc etc.
Funny you should say that...the other day we had a black girl and guy in our apartment complex trying to get people to sign up for electric service to their provider. I walked past the dude and he kept saying sir, sir...I ignored him then he called me racist even though I didnt say a single word. I then told them to f*cking leave and they started calling me racist. Went and got the property manager...he told them to leave...as they were leaving she told the property manager the only reason he was taking by side is because im a "cracker." Then she called property manager a "white f*ggot." But thats ok...no big deal...shes just misunderstood im sure.
I have it all on video...I thought about uploading it to youtube but was worried about repercussions. In the state it was recorded video is ok in public I believe but audio is a problem unless you have consent...minus if you're a police officer...they can always be recorded.
Post by: ponyboy on October 19, 2017, 11:18:01 AM
No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.
"Snowflakes" as applied to people.
Its easier than saying "overly sensitive humanoids that havent been woke yet."
Post by: marble_faun on October 19, 2017, 10:35:12 PM
Before the United States of America became the USA, the British referred to the area as the American colonies. Things from there came to be known as American.
If speakers of other languages want to use "American" to mean other things, they are free to, but it frankly the boat has sailed as far as English is concerned.
"USian" just looks and sounds awful. That would be one of my own Words/Phrases I Wish Would Go Away!
Amerigo Vespucci was an Italian who was employed by the Spanish.
Well yeah. Not sure how that changes anything, unless you mean people should stop referring to themselves as American, because only this one Italian man is the true "America."
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on October 19, 2017, 11:34:49 PM
Middle aged women who talk about "gettin' some awesomesauce time with my peeps" in a sad effort to sound young and hip.
Hint: they don't
My BiL referred to Facebook as "Facey" for about three weeks nine years ago and my MiL still calls it that in an attempt to sound young.
Post by: Davnasty on October 20, 2017, 08:24:14 AM
But in reality it's used to refer to anyone who doesn't agree with your political viewsNo No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.
"Snowflakes" as applied to people.
Its easier than saying "overly sensitive humanoids that havent been woke yet."
Oh yeah, and the term "woke". Just sounds silly
Post by: Freckles on October 20, 2017, 09:29:16 AM
In a very dismissive way. Definitely as an insult.
Post by: Davnasty on October 20, 2017, 10:07:20 AM
No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.Consider this - You're having a conversation with a friend and you refer to him as "retarded". He's not offended, he's your friend and he knows your just giving him a hard time. But the guy with down syndrome who happens to be walking doesn't understand that it's just a joke. And if he does that may be worse because he knows that his existence is the basis for a putdown. Your friend said something stupid and so you compared your friend to him.
This scenario may seem unlikely to you but not everyone with a mental handicap is obvious from appearance and more relevant to your usage here, anyone can read anything written on the internet.
People with mental handicaps have enough obstacles in life, can't you just use a less offensive putdown - like fucking dumbass?
Post by: Kris on October 20, 2017, 10:09:07 AM
No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.Consider this - You're having a conversation with a friend and you refer to him as "retarded". He's not offended, he's your friend and he knows your just giving him a hard time. But the guy with down syndrome who happens to be walking doesn't understand that it's just a joke. And if he does that may be worse because he knows that his existence is the basis for a putdown. Your friend said something stupid and so you compared your friend to him.
This scenario may seem unlikely to you but not everyone with a mental handicap is obvious from appearance and more relevant to your usage here, anyone can read anything written on the internet.
People with mental handicaps have enough obstacles in life, can't you just use a less offensive putdown - like fucking dumbass?
Ponyboy doesn't care. It's "alpha" to be mean and offensive to people.
Post by: dougules on October 20, 2017, 10:16:27 AM
Before the United States of America became the USA, the British referred to the area as the American colonies. Things from there came to be known as American.
If speakers of other languages want to use "American" to mean other things, they are free to, but it frankly the boat has sailed as far as English is concerned.
"USian" just looks and sounds awful. That would be one of my own Words/Phrases I Wish Would Go Away!
Amerigo Vespucci was an Italian who was employed by the Spanish.
Well yeah. Not sure how that changes anything, unless you mean people should stop referring to themselves as American, because only this one Italian man is the true "America."
My point was that the term "America" was for Latin America first. People from the USA are Americans, but so are Canadians, Mexicans, and Brazilians.
Post by: ponyboy on October 20, 2017, 10:27:26 AM
No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.Consider this - You're having a conversation with a friend and you refer to him as "retarded". He's not offended, he's your friend and he knows your just giving him a hard time. But the guy with down syndrome who happens to be walking doesn't understand that it's just a joke. And if he does that may be worse because he knows that his existence is the basis for a putdown. Your friend said something stupid and so you compared your friend to him.
This scenario may seem unlikely to you but not everyone with a mental handicap is obvious from appearance and more relevant to your usage here, anyone can read anything written on the internet.
People with mental handicaps have enough obstacles in life, can't you just use a less offensive putdown - like fucking dumbass?
Retard means slow, delayed. I guess it depends on what context you use the word retard. Should I rearrange my limited vocabulary so I never offend anyone?
I heard a great saying once...this isnt verbatim but close..."when someone says they're offended they want the rest of the world to adjust their points of views to fit theirs." something like that...im sure i can find it but you get the point. Some people need to grow a spine.
Post by: Kris on October 20, 2017, 10:35:29 AM
No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.Consider this - You're having a conversation with a friend and you refer to him as "retarded". He's not offended, he's your friend and he knows your just giving him a hard time. But the guy with down syndrome who happens to be walking doesn't understand that it's just a joke. And if he does that may be worse because he knows that his existence is the basis for a putdown. Your friend said something stupid and so you compared your friend to him.
This scenario may seem unlikely to you but not everyone with a mental handicap is obvious from appearance and more relevant to your usage here, anyone can read anything written on the internet.
People with mental handicaps have enough obstacles in life, can't you just use a less offensive putdown - like fucking dumbass?
Retard means slow, delayed. I guess it depends on what context you use the word retard. Should I rearrange my limited vocabulary so I never offend anyone?
I heard a great saying once...this isnt verbatim but close..."when someone says they're offended they want the rest of the world to adjust their points of views to fit theirs." something like that...im sure i can find it but you get the point. Some people need to grow a spine.
See? Mentally handicapped people just need to grow a spine.
Post by: Davnasty on October 20, 2017, 10:47:04 AM
You're right, it depends on context. So when you asked "Why are people so retarded?" you were referring to people being slow. Which is the origin of the term mental retardation, people who think or develop more slowly than normal. Which means you were comparing people who use a word you don't like to people with a mental disability.No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.Consider this - You're having a conversation with a friend and you refer to him as "retarded". He's not offended, he's your friend and he knows your just giving him a hard time. But the guy with down syndrome who happens to be walking doesn't understand that it's just a joke. And if he does that may be worse because he knows that his existence is the basis for a putdown. Your friend said something stupid and so you compared your friend to him.
This scenario may seem unlikely to you but not everyone with a mental handicap is obvious from appearance and more relevant to your usage here, anyone can read anything written on the internet.
People with mental handicaps have enough obstacles in life, can't you just use a less offensive putdown - like fucking dumbass?
Retard means slow, delayed. I guess it depends on what context you use the word retard. Should I rearrange my limited vocabulary so I never offend anyone?
I heard a great saying once...this isnt verbatim but close..."when someone says they're offended they want the rest of the world to adjust their points of views to fit theirs." something like that...im sure i can find it but you get the point. Some people need to grow a spine.
Exactly how limited is your vocabulary? This might help http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/stupid (http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/stupid)
Post by: Dicey on October 20, 2017, 11:08:41 AM
Some people could benefit from developing a little more compassion for others less fortunate through no fault of their own. These people are not "snowflakes", pronounced in a disparaging manner. They just got handed a different card than you did in the great genetic lottery of life. "Retard" used as a verb, as in fire retardant, is just fine. "Retard/Retarded" used as a noun to describe another human being is just plain rude and insensitive. There are plenty of other words you can use.No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.Consider this - You're having a conversation with a friend and you refer to him as "retarded". He's not offended, he's your friend and he knows your just giving him a hard time. But the guy with down syndrome who happens to be walking doesn't understand that it's just a joke. And if he does that may be worse because he knows that his existence is the basis for a putdown. Your friend said something stupid and so you compared your friend to him.
This scenario may seem unlikely to you but not everyone with a mental handicap is obvious from appearance and more relevant to your usage here, anyone can read anything written on the internet.
People with mental handicaps have enough obstacles in life, can't you just use a less offensive putdown - like fucking dumbass?
Retard means slow, delayed. I guess it depends on what context you use the word retard. Should I rearrange my limited vocabulary so I never offend anyone?
I heard a great saying once...this isnt verbatim but close..."when someone says they're offended they want the rest of the world to adjust their points of views to fit theirs." something like that...im sure i can find it but you get the point. Some people need to grow a spine.
BTW, the example of the solicitors in an apartment complex is completely irrelevant to your use of the word "retarded" to describe another person. Oh, no wait - the relevance is perhaps the way you felt in that situation might be something like what someone with developmental issues might feel like when hearing your unkind words. What does it cost you personally just to select another word? Why not create a habit of not denigrating others of any ability?
Post by: GuitarStv on October 20, 2017, 11:31:30 AM
Another one that bothers me is when Canadians say "North America" when you can tell they're not trying to include Mexico.
Guilty as charged. For some reason my brain refuses to register Mexico as part of North America . . . It's automatically packaged with all those Spanish speaking countries a little further down. Weird, I will try to fix that in the future.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on October 20, 2017, 12:35:41 PM
Another one that bothers me is when Canadians say "North America" when you can tell they're not trying to include Mexico.
Guilty as charged. For some reason my brain refuses to register Mexico as part of North America . . . It's automatically packaged with all those Spanish speaking countries a little further down. Weird, I will try to fix that in the future.
So is that just a Canadian thing? I definitely include Mexico in my immediate mental image of North America. It's hard to imagine doing otherwise.
Post by: dividendman on October 20, 2017, 12:36:52 PM
Serious question. Do you just not ever go or you think it's OK in that context to offend or what?
Post by: ponyboy on October 20, 2017, 01:34:23 PM
For the folks offended by various words and phrases and stereotypes etc. What do you think of stand up comedy or vulgar comedic movies?
Serious question. Do you just not ever go or you think it's OK in that context to offend or what?
The comedians are making jokes yet people are still offended. You'll never change some. Everyone else is supposed to change to conform to what they think is correct. Another reason why history is being erased. If its not politically correct its gotta go. Strange times we live in. Its a nerf'd society.
Post by: ixtap on October 20, 2017, 01:37:34 PM
For the folks offended by various words and phrases and stereotypes etc. What do you think of stand up comedy or vulgar comedic movies?
Serious question. Do you just not ever go or you think it's OK in that context to offend or what?
The comedians are making jokes yet people are still offended. You'll never change some. Everyone else is supposed to change to conform to what they think is correct. Another reason why history is being erased. If its not politically correct its gotta go. Strange times we live in. Its a nerf'd society.
What history is being erased?
Post by: Morning Glory on October 20, 2017, 02:45:14 PM
Post by: Jouer on October 20, 2017, 03:21:42 PM
influencers
toxic people
Breaking. Up. Sentences. Like. This.
self-care
amirite?
"I just NOPED right out of there."
"bad skin" or "good skin" [If it's keeping your organs from falling out of your body, it's doing its job!]
****
I don't have logical, well-thought-out reasons for disliking most of these. I'm just weary of them. Weary of the realms of internet where they tend appear in the wild.
I've never heard of "I just noped right out of there" but I love it! I'm totally adopting it but I'll drop an F-bomb in there to punch it up a little.
Post by: BlueHouse on October 23, 2017, 01:35:46 PM
"Female" instead of "woman" or "girl". Sounds like you're talking about animals. And, I never hear someone who uses "female" like that use "male" the same way.Yes. 1000 times Yes!
Post by: BlueHouse on October 23, 2017, 01:42:18 PM
It's redundant!
Post by: Dicey on October 23, 2017, 01:58:36 PM
24/7/36524 hours in one day, every day
It's redundant!
7 days in a week, every week
365 days in a year, most years
I don't quite get how that's redundant, exactly. Repetitive, certainly. Cumulative too, but redundant? I don't know...
Post by: Freckles on October 23, 2017, 02:21:47 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on October 23, 2017, 02:46:25 PM
I'd much rather be referred to as "female" than "girl" because I am not a child. It's a bit of a pet peeve of mine, like "Girls Night out." We're in our forties and we're the mothers of actual girls. We're not the girls anymore, that ship has sailed.
I guess I have mixed feelings about this one. My grandmother, even in her 80s, used to talk about meeting "the girls" for lunch or whatever. It was cute at her age. But when it's a group of 40-somethings who are trying to deny that they are not "young" anymore, it's not so cute. I'm not sure at what age the line should be drawn.
"Female" is definitely horrible. Makes me think of rappers and lyrics that talk about women like occasionally-useful objects.
Post by: Miss Piggy on October 23, 2017, 03:19:48 PM
I'd much rather be referred to as "female" than "girl" because I am not a child. It's a bit of a pet peeve of mine, like "Girls Night out." We're in our forties and we're the mothers of actual girls. We're not the girls anymore, that ship has sailed.
Interesting how we all get hung up on different things. "Girls" never bothered me, but plenty of other random stuff does!
Here's my word of the day from yesterday: Pronunciate. Please...just...no.
Post by: BlueHouse on October 23, 2017, 05:41:52 PM
24/7/36524 hours in one day, every day
It's redundant!
7 days in a week, every week
365 days in a year, most years
I don't quite get how that's redundant, exactly. Repetitive, certainly. Cumulative too, but redundant? I don't know...
There are two instances of days. So to say 7 days a week and 365 days a year...yes it's redundant. Now if someone wanted to say 24/7/52(weeks in a year), then I guess that would be okay.
Post by: Dicey on October 23, 2017, 10:40:55 PM
I think I see what you're getting at. Is it the asymmetry that bugs you?24/7/36524 hours in one day, every day
It's redundant!
7 days in a week, every week
365 days in a year, most years
I don't quite get how that's redundant, exactly. Repetitive, certainly. Cumulative too, but redundant? I don't know...
There are two instances of days. So to say 7 days a week and 365 days a year...yes it's redundant. Now if someone wanted to say 24/7/52(weeks in a year), then I guess that would be okay.
Post by: gerardc on October 23, 2017, 10:52:46 PM
I think I see what you're getting at. Is it the asymmetry that bugs you?
It's the redundancy, like he said. 365 days a year implies 7 days a week, no need to specify 7 days a week. Now, 52 weeks a year doesn't imply anything as to the number of days per week, so you'd need to specify the 7.
Post by: BlueHouse on October 25, 2017, 08:56:29 AM
I'd much rather be referred to as "female" than "girl" because I am not a child. It's a bit of a pet peeve of mine, like "Girls Night out." We're in our forties and we're the mothers of actual girls. We're not the girls anymore, that ship has sailed.
Interesting how we all get hung up on different things. "Girls" never bothered me, but plenty of other random stuff does!
Me too. "Girls" has never bothered me, but I have always hated the term "Gal". I can trace it back to my first office job during High School. "The men" got the serious jobs and "the gals" got to type their letters, make coffee, open mail, and answer the phones. I worked there after school thru high school and when I went away to college I was told I might be the first "gal" on the sales team after I graduated. What an honor! Fat chance!
The people were incredibly nice and supportive, but they were a small company and just didn't have enough examples of how to treat women fairly and equally. I didn't want to be their test case and I certainly didn't want anyone thinking they were doing me any favors for allowing me to do the same work as anyone else.
whew. rant over.
Post by: Davnasty on October 25, 2017, 09:36:49 AM
For the folks offended by various words and phrases and stereotypes etc. What do you think of stand up comedy or vulgar comedic movies?That's a really tough question. I did at one time feel like it's just words and in the context of a comedy they don't mean anything by it. I've noticed as I get older and more importantly as I've been exposed to more people who live a very different life than I do, whether it be because they are gay, disabled, another race etc., I feel like there is (almost) no place for jokes that stereotype groups of people. Even if the person making the jokes has no ill will towards said group, saying certain things out loud can influence feelings in small incremental ways that most people don't even notice. More importantly, even if a comedian and some of their audience have the exposure to recognize a joke for what it is, many other viewers assume there is more truth in the jokes than there really is.
Serious question. Do you just not ever go or you think it's OK in that context to offend or what?
As an example, growing up I saw lots of jokes relating gay men to certain behaviors. I still think these jokes can be funny and lots of gay men even partake in these types of jokes, they aren't all negative stereotypes. However, the more I realize how many gay men don't fit these stereotypes I can see how the assumption that all gay men behave this way may make them less likely to come out. I worked for someone part time for a while, a gay man from Kentucky who ran an agricultural breeding program and therefore worked around lots of conservative farmers. Obviously he was not hiding it but if he had been, there would have been little indication. He was a big burly guy with a gut who dipped Copenhagen all day - He did like to bake though :)
Long story short I think stereotyping in comedy can almost always be damaging to society. Does that mean we should never make these jokes? That's still a really tough question.
ETA: I still didn't really answer the question. Third option. I don't think it's good to make certain jokes but I watch plenty of offensive movies and laugh at the jokes anyways. Being offended by something doesn't mean you don't find it funny. Generally when I'm offended it's on someone else's behalf, not because I have a weak constitution and my pretty little ears can't take it. I think that's one of the big misconceptions that come from the "it's just a joke" crowd. Ya, I know what a joke is but the joke itself isn't always the problem. The problem is that jokes influence opinions and opinions lead to actions like making laws that ban people from specific countries or make it so certain people don't enjoy the same freedoms that I do. In other cases it is the joke. For example, using the word retard doesn't hurt my feelings but it does hurt the feelings of people who may not even have the mental capacity to understand that it's just a joke.
Post by: GreenSheep on October 25, 2017, 10:35:28 AM
Long story short I think stereotyping in comedy can almost always be damaging to society. Does that mean we should never make these jokes? That's still a really tough question.
It is a tough question, and something I've been thinking about lately. Most people seem to think that it's okay to poke fun at your own unique qualities, including your own race/national origin. Most people also seem to think it's okay to make fun of white people regardless of your own race. But does a minority who makes fun of him/herself maybe give other people the idea that it's okay to make fun of others in the same way? And when someday the majority of the US population is no longer white, will it still be okay to make fun of white people?
As a white person, I obviously have zero first-hand knowledge of the experiences of people from other backgrounds. But when I consider the fact that it doesn't feel good to be called a "basic white girl" or a "cracker," I can only imagine the pain that insults directed at other races must inflict, even if they are meant to be somehow friendly and funny.
I think we should all be able to laugh at ourselves for our stupid mistakes, our big nose, our funny-looking feet, etc. And with close friends, sure, we should be able to exchange friendly banter about each other's differences. But given the fact that there's so much horrible history associated with treating people differently for their race, maybe it's best to stay away from that area.
Post by: Laura33 on October 26, 2017, 06:32:51 AM
For the folks offended by various words and phrases and stereotypes etc. What do you think of stand up comedy or vulgar comedic movies?
Serious question. Do you just not ever go or you think it's OK in that context to offend or what?
It's not hard conceptually, it's just subtle. Fundamentally, it is about power. Making fun of people "below" you in the social hierarchy is bullying and so not funny; making fun of people above you in the social hierarchy is subversive and so can be funny. And making fun of yourself or your own group falls into the subversive/funny category.
The other aspect is that comedy has to be unexpected. Jokes based on stereotypes aren't funny because there is nothing unexpected about them -- like, really, that's the best you've got? OTOH, flipping stereotypes is unexpected. The best jokes reveal a truth that the audience never noticed before -- think of Chris Rock on the difference between "rich" and "wealthy."
Best example I can think of is "Blazing Saddles" (one of the funniest movies ever made). Plentiful use of the word "nigger," but used to mock the idiocy of the people who would call a powerful black man a "nigger."
To my mind, I don't personally care much about hurtful words, because it says more about the speaker than about the person/group he is referring to. Hell, I am foul-mouthed and detest euphemisms myself; there are no sensitive ears here that require protection. But I do object to disparaging words when deployed by people with power against people without, who cannot defend themselves or strike back -- like, say, the boss calling his underlings "gals" and expecting them to get coffee (flashback to "9 to 5" here). In many instances, it's just largely cluelessness (that particular boss was probably trying to avoid saying "girls" because he knew that was bad, but thought "women" sounded too formal and so chose "gals" thinking it was the most comparable to "guys). In that case, I'm most likely to respond along the lines of "dude, you know what that sounds like, right?"
OTOH, someone who is well aware that a particular word hurts but insists on continuing to use it is just a bully and an asshole.
Post by: GuitarStv on October 26, 2017, 08:39:25 AM
For the folks offended by various words and phrases and stereotypes etc. What do you think of stand up comedy or vulgar comedic movies?
Serious question. Do you just not ever go or you think it's OK in that context to offend or what?
It's not hard conceptually, it's just subtle. Fundamentally, it is about power. Making fun of people "below" you in the social hierarchy is bullying and so not funny; making fun of people above you in the social hierarchy is subversive and so can be funny. And making fun of yourself or your own group falls into the subversive/funny category.
The other aspect is that comedy has to be unexpected. Jokes based on stereotypes aren't funny because there is nothing unexpected about them -- like, really, that's the best you've got? OTOH, flipping stereotypes is unexpected. The best jokes reveal a truth that the audience never noticed before -- think of Chris Rock on the difference between "rich" and "wealthy."
Best example I can think of is "Blazing Saddles" (one of the funniest movies ever made). Plentiful use of the word "nigger," but used to mock the idiocy of the people who would call a powerful black man a "nigger."
To my mind, I don't personally care much about hurtful words, because it says more about the speaker than about the person/group he is referring to. Hell, I am foul-mouthed and detest euphemisms myself; there are no sensitive ears here that require protection. But I do object to disparaging words when deployed by people with power against people without, who cannot defend themselves or strike back -- like, say, the boss calling his underlings "gals" and expecting them to get coffee (flashback to "9 to 5" here). In many instances, it's just largely cluelessness (that particular boss was probably trying to avoid saying "girls" because he knew that was bad, but thought "women" sounded too formal and so chose "gals" thinking it was the most comparable to "guys). In that case, I'm most likely to respond along the lines of "dude, you know what that sounds like, right?"
OTOH, someone who is well aware that a particular word hurts but insists on continuing to use it is just a bully and an asshole.
Agreed. The best comedy tends to use stereotypes and stereotypical situations to highlight things that don't make sense, to make us question beliefs, convention, and societal norms.
Post by: BlueHouse on October 26, 2017, 10:31:09 AM
OTOH, someone who is well aware that a particular word hurts but insists on continuing to use it is just a bully and an asshole.
I agree with this statement and would like to add my $0.02. Anyone who uses the word "snowflake" to denigrate another person's feelings, is a bully.
Post by: marble_faun on October 26, 2017, 01:33:51 PM
On pregnancy forums, you'll find all kinds of cutesy acronyms and euphemisms, and by the far the worst is...
BABY DANCING (or "BD")
which means "sex."
It's just too, too horrible!
Post by: Kris on October 26, 2017, 01:52:21 PM
Ooh, I thought of another.
On pregnancy forums, you'll find all kinds of cutesy acronyms and euphemisms, and by the far the worst is...
BABY DANCING (or "BD")
which means "sex."
It's just too, too horrible!
This one wins. Hands down.
We're done here, people.
Post by: ketchup on October 26, 2017, 03:33:55 PM
That's definitely the worst. Wow. Why not just call it something less offensive, like "fucking"?Ooh, I thought of another.
On pregnancy forums, you'll find all kinds of cutesy acronyms and euphemisms, and by the far the worst is...
BABY DANCING (or "BD")
which means "sex."
It's just too, too horrible!
This one wins. Hands down.
We're done here, people.
Post by: GreenSheep on October 26, 2017, 04:24:54 PM
That's definitely the worst. Wow. Why not just call it something less offensive, like "fucking"?Ooh, I thought of another.
On pregnancy forums, you'll find all kinds of cutesy acronyms and euphemisms, and by the far the worst is...
BABY DANCING (or "BD")
which means "sex."
It's just too, too horrible!
This one wins. Hands down.
We're done here, people.
OMG. I wish I could un-see that. I agree. There can't possibly be a worse phrase.
Post by: Davnasty on October 27, 2017, 07:24:11 AM
I would be just as revolted by this as everyone else if it wasn't for the fact that I keep picturing the Ally McBeal dancing baby.That's definitely the worst. Wow. Why not just call it something less offensive, like "fucking"?Ooh, I thought of another.
On pregnancy forums, you'll find all kinds of cutesy acronyms and euphemisms, and by the far the worst is...
BABY DANCING (or "BD")
which means "sex."
It's just too, too horrible!
This one wins. Hands down.
We're done here, people.
OMG. I wish I could un-see that. I agree. There can't possibly be a worse phrase.
Post by: dividendman on October 27, 2017, 09:56:08 AM
It's a 2 week anniversary!
We had our 6 month anniversary!
Say what? That makes no sense.
Post by: Davnasty on October 27, 2017, 01:49:54 PM
I wish people would stop saying anniversary for less than 1 year intervals.Ya, it's a septiversary and mensiversary. get it right people.
It's a 2 week anniversary!
We had our 6 month anniversary!
Say what? That makes no sense.
Post by: nnls on October 27, 2017, 11:56:19 PM
I wish people would stop saying anniversary for less than 1 year intervals.
It's a 2 week anniversary!
We had our 6 month anniversary!
Say what? That makes no sense.
I hate this! a family friend recently celebrated her 28 month anniversary with her fiance. It is ridiculous.
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on October 28, 2017, 01:20:53 AM
Ooh, I thought of another.
On pregnancy forums, you'll find all kinds of cutesy acronyms and euphemisms, and by the far the worst is...
BABY DANCING (or "BD")
which means "sex."
It's just too, too horrible!
Jesus fucking christ, this is a new one for me.
Makes my skin crawl!
That's definitely the worst. Wow. Why not just call it something less offensive, like "fucking"?
I like you.
Post by: MrsTuxedocat on October 28, 2017, 01:32:12 AM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 29, 2017, 06:12:34 AM
Okay, I'll join --in. I hate, hate being called a girl -- I'm not a girl, I am freakin adult.Definitely. People should flip this - would you call a man of any age a boy? If he is not a boy, then she is not a girl, she is a woman.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwMOC5i2eRk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwMOC5i2eRk)
Post by: GuitarStv on October 30, 2017, 11:09:13 AM
That's definitely the worst. Wow. Why not just call it something less offensive, like "fucking"?Ooh, I thought of another.
On pregnancy forums, you'll find all kinds of cutesy acronyms and euphemisms, and by the far the worst is...
BABY DANCING (or "BD")
which means "sex."
It's just too, too horrible!
This one wins. Hands down.
We're done here, people.
I prefer "playing poke the baby" to BD.
Post by: EMMoneY on November 10, 2017, 06:34:45 PM
"Prezzie" (a gift / present) a 60+ yr old blogger uses that and I keep wondering if she's regressed to toddlerhood
"radonkadonk" and any other word used where 'ridiculous' will suffice
"Boo" when used to mean one's significant other
Post by: nnls on November 10, 2017, 08:10:53 PM
"Throw shade"
"Prezzie" (a gift / present) a 60+ yr old blogger uses that and I keep wondering if she's regressed to toddlerhood
"radonkadonk" and any other word used where 'ridiculous' will suffice
"Boo" when used to mean one's significant other
I think prezzie is pretty common in Australia. Is the blogger Australian?
Post by: calimom on November 10, 2017, 10:04:02 PM
That's definitely the worst. Wow. Why not just call it something less offensive, like "fucking"?Ooh, I thought of another.
On pregnancy forums, you'll find all kinds of cutesy acronyms and euphemisms, and by the far the worst is...
BABY DANCING (or "BD")
which means "sex."
It's just too, too horrible!
This one wins. Hands down.
We're done here, people.
I prefer "playing poke the baby" to BD.
Is this something that occurs during the Baby Moon? in order to get a classier/more expensive Push Present?
Post by: EMMoneY on November 11, 2017, 08:33:25 PM
I think prezzie is pretty common in Australia. Is the blogger Australian?
No, she's from the western U.S. She also uses "a little sumptin' sumptin'" to describe gifts. I had to stop reading her blog, I nearly wanted to tear my hair out reading a grandmother posting like a tween.
Post by: NoraLenderbee on November 13, 2017, 05:38:23 PM
No No...im keeping the word retard in my vocabulary. So many snowflakes want it banished and its not going to happen.
Interestingly, "retarded" was originally considered a more polite and sensitive way to refer to the mentally handicapped. It replaced terms such as "mentally deficient."
Now we're introducing "developmentally delayed" as a euphemism for a euphemism.
I strongly disagree that "retarded" is equivalent to a racial slur. It is a neutral descriptive word just like "delayed" or "handicapped." People will always find ways to call each other stupid, and whatever new euphemism is introduced, someone will soon start using it as an insult. It's an endless arms race. Remember the words idiot, imbecile, and moron? They were originally introduced as scientific, non-derogatory terms for degrees of mental deficiency.
Post by: shelivesthedream on November 14, 2017, 01:03:33 AM
Re: offensive comedy - I avoid vulgar films and comedians that I think might offend me. I don't always get it right, but I don't want to be sitting there listening to stuff I won't find funny or clever. That said, I grew up in a very Jewish and Indian school where it was normal for these groups to poke fun at themselves. There was even an ongoing thing about "Brown Town" - "Everywhere else, you get 99% and your mum is so pleased she buys you a cake. In Brown Town, she's so angry about the 1% that you get grounded." That kind of thing. I think we even did a skit about Brown Town in assembly once. Anyway, I tend to find Jew jokes and Indian jokes by Jewish and Indian comedians funny, but the same jokes by white comedians would make me uncomfortable. I think it is an in-group vs making fun of thing. I suppose so think of myself as "in" with the Indians so it's like hearing a joke from a peer, and I get a lot of the references. Hearing "some white person" joking about Indians is not like hearing it from a peer (even though I am white) so I would avoid someone I knew to make such jokes. Now I live in a predominantly black area I am coming to appreciate Chris Rock.
For example: I always switch off Jimmy Carr. I'm just not going to enjoy it. But I find David Mitchell hilarious because he pokes fun at himself and he is so like me (awkward white middle class intellectual). I can nod along and say "So true!"
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on November 15, 2017, 09:42:22 AM
I strongly disagree that "retarded" is equivalent to a racial slur. It is a neutral descriptive word just like "delayed" or "handicapped." People will always find ways to call each other stupid, and whatever new euphemism is introduced, someone will soon start using it as an insult. It's an endless arms race. Remember the words idiot, imbecile, and moron? They were originally introduced as scientific, non-derogatory terms for degrees of mental deficiency.
I'm not arguing that it's equivalent to a racial slur, but what you call an arms race is just the natural evolution of language. None of us can control how our words are heard by others, but we can all choose which words we use. And words are only useful as long as we all agree on what they mean.
^This. You can argue all you want about the absurdity of the euphemism treadmill, but you don't get to choose how your words are interpreted by others, so choose them wisely unless you specifically aim to offend. I have a son who is in a wheelchair, and would be offended if people started to call him "lame", even though that was, at one time, an appropriate term for his disability. (lame -> crippled -> handicapped -> disabled -> person with a disability). I don't call things that I don't like "lame", just like I don't call people with whom I disagree "retarded". I don't get worked up over people who used the term "handicapped", because that's not really used as a pejorative term. Some people are offended by it, so I try to use language that I know is unlikely to hurt any feelings. It's really not much of an imposition.
Post by: shelivesthedream on November 15, 2017, 11:07:44 AM
I don't get worked up over people who used the term "handicapped", because that's not really used as a pejorative term. Some people are offended by it, so I try to use language that I know is unlikely to hurt any feelings. It's really not much of an imposition.
Yikes, I think it is over here. Makes me cringe every time I hear it. "Disabled" is the accepted norm in Britain.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on November 15, 2017, 11:33:42 AM
I don't get worked up over people who used the term "handicapped", because that's not really used as a pejorative term. Some people are offended by it, so I try to use language that I know is unlikely to hurt any feelings. It's really not much of an imposition.
Yikes, I think it is over here. Makes me cringe every time I hear it. "Disabled" is the accepted norm in Britain.
Like I said, I don't use it, but it doesn't offend me. I can't recall a single instance of someone using it as an insult.
Edit to add: Typically, the only time I ever hear someone use the term "handicapped" is in reference to a parking spot. Actually, now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure that's the term I use myself. "Disabled parking" or "disabled persons' parking" sounds weird. The commonly-used term here is "handicapped parking". Language is weird.
Post by: Davnasty on November 15, 2017, 12:11:41 PM
Another thought this time on why people are resistant to these changes - Some people's response of "too much work, don't be so sensitive" is not because it really is too much work but rather because they don't like being corrected. No one likes being corrected and to be fair there are some word police who will correct you in a not so nice way. If I slip up and use a term that is offensive but debatably so or maybe I didn't even know that it was offensive, It sucks when somebody jumps on me and acts like I'm a dick for saying it. My immediate reaction might be "fuck you, I say what I want" not because I want to hurt people's feelings by using the word but because I'm being spiteful. In short I'd say a lot of people who are resistant to the evolution of words act that way because they don't like people correcting them.
Post by: MustachioedPistachio on November 15, 2017, 12:49:49 PM
The first phrase is technically correct (https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/27391/etymology-of-fixing-to), while the second is redundant. :)
The misuse of "lose" and "loose" is especially grating to me.
Post by: WootWoot on November 15, 2017, 02:06:05 PM
Baby bump
Amazing
I mean, come on: How many things are truly "amazing"?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 15, 2017, 03:12:12 PM
Just a thought on the "acceptable word treadmill" - It seems words that were used legitimately long ago such as idiot, imbecile but are now used exclusively as insults are ok to use as insults but not to describe a person with a mental disability. New words used to describe an actual condition are ok to use in context but not as an insult (that's how they get on the treadmill). Words that began as legitimate terms for a condition but have been used as an insult long enough that they are commonly recognized as an insult should not be used for their original purpose or as an insult. After enough time has passed to disconnect the word from it's original usage it may be acceptable to use as an insult.
Another thought this time on why people are resistant to these changes - Some people's response of "too much work, don't be so sensitive" is not because it really is too much work but rather because they don't like being corrected. No one likes being corrected and to be fair there are some word police who will correct you in a not so nice way. If I slip up and use a term that is offensive but debatably so or maybe I didn't even know that it was offensive, It sucks when somebody jumps on me and acts like I'm a dick for saying it. My immediate reaction might be "fuck you, I say what I want" not because I want to hurt people's feelings by using the word but because I'm being spiteful. In short I'd say a lot of people who are resistant to the evolution of words act that way because they don't like people correcting them.
I still miss the word "gay" in the sense of its use in South Pacific; somehow light-hearted does't quite convey the same meaning. But it is gone from my vocabulary now, because meanings shifted.
Post by: EMMoneY on November 15, 2017, 06:27:43 PM
Post by: dougules on November 16, 2017, 11:32:57 AM
In parts of the southeastern US, you'll hear "I'm fixin' to go to the store" or some other variant. My favorite: "I'm fixin' to get ready to go..."
The first phrase is technically correct (https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/27391/etymology-of-fixing-to), while the second is redundant. :)
The misuse of "lose" and "loose" is especially grating to me.
"Going" doesn't really make any sense. You be sitting on the couch with your laptop and be "going" to turn on your computer even though you don't plan to leave the couch. No travel involved.
One sense of the word "Fix" in the dictionary, on the other hand, is "prepare." You can be preparing to get ready (meta-preparation), so fixing to get ready makes complete sense. "Going to keep sitting on the couch" and "Going to go to the store" make none if you think about it.
Post by: WootWoot on November 16, 2017, 03:21:36 PM
Post by: dougules on November 16, 2017, 03:49:44 PM
I still hear kids saying "Oh, that's so gay" sometimes. I don't know if they mean it as a homophobic putdown but I suspect they do. I doubt they mean "queer" as in "peculiar."
I called a kid out on it one time. He got really apologetic.
Post by: shelivesthedream on November 17, 2017, 05:18:01 AM
Post by: dougules on November 17, 2017, 11:16:18 AM
"shitting out babies" - what a hideous, hideous turn of phrase.
What? Fortunately I've never heard that before. Is that a British thing?
Post by: shelivesthedream on November 17, 2017, 11:38:00 AM
"shitting out babies" - what a hideous, hideous turn of phrase.
What? Fortunately I've never heard that before. Is that a British thing?
Absolutely not! I have never ever heard or read it in real life but have read it lots of times on this (largely American) forum.
Post by: NoraLenderbee on November 17, 2017, 12:38:48 PM
I strongly disagree that "retarded" is equivalent to a racial slur. It is a neutral descriptive word just like "delayed" or "handicapped." People will always find ways to call each other stupid, and whatever new euphemism is introduced, someone will soon start using it as an insult. It's an endless arms race. Remember the words idiot, imbecile, and moron? They were originally introduced as scientific, non-derogatory terms for degrees of mental deficiency.
I'm not arguing that it's equivalent to a racial slur, but what you call an arms race is just the natural evolution of language. None of us can control how our words are heard by others, but we can all choose which words we use. And words are only useful as long as we all agree on what they mean.
^This. You can argue all you want about the absurdity of the euphemism treadmill, but you don't get to choose how your words are interpreted by others, so choose them wisely unless you specifically aim to offend.
This thread is about words we wish would go away, not words we insist on using in spite of their effect on other people. I don't need to be lectured, thanks.
Post by: Boll weevil on November 17, 2017, 01:38:12 PM
-"perfect storm"
-"laser focused"
-Adding "-gate" to any scandal
-"honestly"
I'm getting tired of "fake news", and think the speakers/authors should get better at distinguishing between "fake news" (also known as lies) and "real gossip / information that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things".
I also think "hero" and "evil" are overused.
Post by: marble_faun on November 17, 2017, 02:16:18 PM
"shitting out babies" - what a hideous, hideous turn of phrase.
Ugh. I hate that too. Just a needlessly crude way of describing someone's family and the arrival of tiny, new human beings.
Post by: Tyson on November 17, 2017, 05:05:58 PM
The words and terms I really don't like are
-"perfect storm"
-"laser focused"
-Adding "-gate" to any scandal
-"honestly"
I'm getting tired of "fake news", and think the speakers/authors should get better at distinguishing between "fake news" (also known as lies) and "real gossip / information that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things".
I also think "hero" and "evil" are overused.
I have to say, you're my hero for pointing out all these evil phrases :-)
Post by: GreenSheep on November 17, 2017, 07:36:11 PM
The very last time I ever met with my financial advisor, before quietly firing him and moving my funds to Vanguard, thanks to this forum, I counted the number of times he said "at the end of the day" while yammering on and on at me for half an hour about random market/investment junk. It was the only way I could stay focused and appear to be politely listening. He used that phrase 30-something times.
That said, even before that experience, I've always hated "at the end of the day," unless you're literally talking about something that will occur at the end of the day.
Post by: Chesleygirl on November 20, 2017, 07:12:17 AM
Post by: GreenSheep on November 20, 2017, 10:55:29 AM
I hate it when someone posts "RIP" with regard to someone's death, particularly if it was someone they knew. I find it somewhat disrespectful to not spell it out, as it doesn't take that long to type "Rest in Peace".
Yes! And the same for HBD (Happy Birthday). If you can't be bothered to type or write 2-3 words, you probably don't care very much. (And HBD doesn't even make sense. Shouldn't it be just HB?)
Post by: Dicey on November 20, 2017, 11:35:23 AM
Forgive me if this has been mentioned already. I've read the whole thread, but I don't remember!The only exception is if you happen to be cast in "Les Miserables". Full props to you if you have that kind of vocal ability.
The very last time I ever met with my financial advisor, before quietly firing him and moving my funds to Vanguard, thanks to this forum, I counted the number of times he said "at the end of the day" while yammering on and on at me for half an hour about random market/investment junk. It was the only way I could stay focused and appear to be politely listening. He used that phrase 30-something times.
That said, even before that experience, I've always hated "at the end of the day," unless you're literally talking about something that will occur at the end of the day.
Post by: C-note on November 20, 2017, 11:42:52 AM
You lose some professional points on my non-scientific interview scale and I actually tally the number of times the candidate uses "kiddo(s)" during an interview.
"Peeps" was another of my fingernails-on-a-chalkboard words but it appears to be dying a natural death.
Post by: calimom on November 20, 2017, 01:03:23 PM
Kiddo(s) - especially in the setting of a job interview. kiddos this - or kiddos that - or my kiddos - kiddos, kiddos, kiddos. Ugh. Stop already!
You lose some professional points on my non-scientific interview scale and I actually tally the number of times the candidate uses "kiddo(s)" during an interview.
"Peeps" was another of my fingernails-on-a-chalkboard words but it appears to be dying a natural death.
I think I might have brought up "peeps" in an earlier post on this thread. I'd love to see that one disappear altogether. The only time it should be used is in reference to that horrible, yet tastelessly funny, Easter treat.
+1 on "kiddos". Can we add "littles" to the list? Why do people need to use that one when referring to younger children?
Post by: Step37 on November 20, 2017, 08:01:41 PM
Forgive me if this has been mentioned already. I've read the whole thread, but I don't remember!The only exception is if you happen to be cast in "Les Miserables". Full props to you if you have that kind of vocal ability.
The very last time I ever met with my financial advisor, before quietly firing him and moving my funds to Vanguard, thanks to this forum, I counted the number of times he said "at the end of the day" while yammering on and on at me for half an hour about random market/investment junk. It was the only way I could stay focused and appear to be politely listening. He used that phrase 30-something times.
That said, even before that experience, I've always hated "at the end of the day," unless you're literally talking about something that will occur at the end of the day.
Hahahaha! Yes (to both of you)!
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on November 20, 2017, 08:32:30 PM
Kiddo(s) - especially in the setting of a job interview. kiddos this - or kiddos that - or my kiddos - kiddos, kiddos, kiddos. Ugh. Stop already!
... how would that come up in a job interview?
"Yes, I have a Working With Children check which means I'm cleared to work with kiddos."
"I'm married but don't have any kiddos."
"I was let go from my previous role for persistent use of the word kiddos."
Post by: C-note on November 21, 2017, 08:20:14 AM
Kiddo(s) - especially in the setting of a job interview. kiddos this - or kiddos that - or my kiddos - kiddos, kiddos, kiddos. Ugh. Stop already!
... how would that come up in a job interview?
"Yes, I have a Working With Children check which means I'm cleared to work with kiddos."
"I'm married but don't have any kiddos."
"I was let go from my previous role for persistent use of the word kiddos."
I work in district administration for public school. In our interview questions, there may be scenarios or "Tell us a time when . . . " questions which typically involves children in the responses. Candidates will replace "children" or "students" with "kiddos" throughout their entire interview.
And a resounding "YES!" @calimom on including "littles" along with "kiddos" on the list.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on November 22, 2017, 06:14:05 AM
DW and I actually use "littles" when referring to our younger children (we have 6), but only to distinguish them as a group from the older kids, and not as an attempt to be cute. E.g. "I'll take the littles with me and leave the others at home." It's a useful term, although it *does* only save a single syllable over "younger kids."Kiddo(s) - especially in the setting of a job interview. kiddos this - or kiddos that - or my kiddos - kiddos, kiddos, kiddos. Ugh. Stop already!
... how would that come up in a job interview?
"Yes, I have a Working With Children check which means I'm cleared to work with kiddos."
"I'm married but don't have any kiddos."
"I was let go from my previous role for persistent use of the word kiddos."
I work in district administration for public school. In our interview questions, there may be scenarios or "Tell us a time when . . . " questions which typically involves children in the responses. Candidates will replace "children" or "students" with "kiddos" throughout their entire interview.
And a resounding "YES!" @calimom on including "littles" along with "kiddos" on the list.
Post by: WootWoot on November 30, 2017, 12:26:09 PM
"go-to"
As in, "Bob is my go-to guy when I have computer problems."
Post by: Kris on November 30, 2017, 12:50:12 PM
Two examples:
"No problemo."
"Boocoo (beaucoup) bucks."
Ugh.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 30, 2017, 03:15:11 PM
I have a particular dislike of simple words or phrases from other languages that have been intentionally or unintentionally mangled.
Two examples:
"No problemo."
"Boocoo (beaucoup) bucks."
Ugh.
If you ever visit Montreal you will be chatting with a lot of people who switch languages in the middle of a sentence. Not to mention the Anglos who have anglicized a bunch of French words. I didn't know what a 7-11 (corner store) was until University out-of-province, it was the depanneur ("I'm going to the dep, anyone want to come?"). We make bilingual jokes too - in Montreal people take the BMW to work - that is BusMetroWalk.
And at least bocoo bucks says beaucoup right, I hate walla for voila. There is a v in voila.
Post by: Kris on November 30, 2017, 03:38:55 PM
I have a particular dislike of simple words or phrases from other languages that have been intentionally or unintentionally mangled.
Two examples:
"No problemo."
"Boocoo (beaucoup) bucks."
Ugh.
If you ever visit Montreal you will be chatting with a lot of people who switch languages in the middle of a sentence. Not to mention the Anglos who have anglicized a bunch of French words. I didn't know what a 7-11 (corner store) was until University out-of-province, it was the depanneur ("I'm going to the dep, anyone want to come?"). We make bilingual jokes too - in Montreal people take the BMW to work - that is BusMetroWalk.
And at least bocoo bucks says beaucoup right, I hate walla for voila. There is a v in voila.
Yeah, I know. I'm a former French professor. I'm well acquainted with Montreal.
My problem is with using the words completely incorrectly.
The word "problemo" doesn't exist in Spanish. For example.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 30, 2017, 05:25:40 PM
I have a particular dislike of simple words or phrases from other languages that have been intentionally or unintentionally mangled.
Two examples:
"No problemo."
"Boocoo (beaucoup) bucks."
Ugh.
If you ever visit Montreal you will be chatting with a lot of people who switch languages in the middle of a sentence. Not to mention the Anglos who have anglicized a bunch of French words. I didn't know what a 7-11 (corner store) was until University out-of-province, it was the depanneur ("I'm going to the dep, anyone want to come?"). We make bilingual jokes too - in Montreal people take the BMW to work - that is BusMetroWalk.
And at least bocoo bucks says beaucoup right, I hate walla for voila. There is a v in voila.
Yeah, I know. I'm a former French professor. I'm well acquainted with Montreal.
My problem is with using the words completely incorrectly.
The word "problemo" doesn't exist in Spanish. For example.
Using them incorrectly would annoy me too. I looked more at the beaucoup because I do know (well, used to know, I am an example of don't use it, you lose it) French, but no Spanish. Plus "mangled" is not quite the same as "used incorrectly".
Post by: Kris on November 30, 2017, 05:48:54 PM
I have a particular dislike of simple words or phrases from other languages that have been intentionally or unintentionally mangled.
Two examples:
"No problemo."
"Boocoo (beaucoup) bucks."
Ugh.
If you ever visit Montreal you will be chatting with a lot of people who switch languages in the middle of a sentence. Not to mention the Anglos who have anglicized a bunch of French words. I didn't know what a 7-11 (corner store) was until University out-of-province, it was the depanneur ("I'm going to the dep, anyone want to come?"). We make bilingual jokes too - in Montreal people take the BMW to work - that is BusMetroWalk.
And at least bocoo bucks says beaucoup right, I hate walla for voila. There is a v in voila.
Yeah, I know. I'm a former French professor. I'm well acquainted with Montreal.
My problem is with using the words completely incorrectly.
The word "problemo" doesn't exist in Spanish. For example.
Using them incorrectly would annoy me too. I looked more at the beaucoup because I do know (well, used to know, I am an example of don't use it, you lose it) French, but no Spanish. Plus "mangled" is not quite the same as "used incorrectly".
"Mangled" refers to the fact that "problemo" is a mangled version of "problema."
And that "boocoo bucks" is a mangled form of, at minimum, Beau-coo d'argent. "Beaucoo bux," even if you were pronouncing beaucoup correctly, is basically saying "many money."
And then there's the hospital where I was born. Buena Vista Hospital, in Buena Vista county, Iowa. Pronounced "BYOO-nuh vista."
I was probably irritated by this even at birth.
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 01, 2017, 02:18:15 AM
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on December 01, 2017, 05:01:19 AM
I’m also not a fan of the DH, DW, DD, DS shortenings for husband, wife, daughter, and son. I think it’s because when I read it, in my head, I’m still hearing “dear (however you are related to me)” and pretty much nobody ever says that out loud or writes that in full.
Post by: Mrbeardedbigbucks on December 01, 2017, 05:19:02 AM
and
"Happy wife, happy life"
I constantly hear these phrases around the office from a bunch of uptight conservative white guys.
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 01, 2017, 08:07:59 AM
Shit ton. That one grates on me for some reason.
I’m also not a fan of the DH, DW, DD, DS shortenings for husband, wife, daughter, and son. I think it’s because when I read it, in my head, I’m still hearing “dear (however you are related to me)” and pretty much nobody ever says that out loud or writes that in full.
Especially since so many people (Mumsnetters, I'm looking at you!) use it while complaining about what a total waster their DH is. I know the D can allegedly stand for different things, but that's just a retrospective justification.
Post by: calimom on December 01, 2017, 10:59:20 AM
I have a particular dislike of simple words or phrases from other languages that have been intentionally or unintentionally mangled.
Two examples:
"No problemo."
"Boocoo (beaucoup) bucks."
Ugh.
Say La Vee.
Post by: dougules on December 01, 2017, 11:20:59 AM
I have a particular dislike of simple words or phrases from other languages that have been intentionally or unintentionally mangled.
Two examples:
"No problemo."
"Boocoo (beaucoup) bucks."
Ugh.
Say La Vee.
The whole English language is basically words or phrases from other languages that have been intentionally or unintentionally mangled.
Post by: jinga nation on December 01, 2017, 01:50:59 PM
Subject Matter Experts (SME)
<topic> Guru, e.g. Cloud Guru
VP of <bullshit department>
Associate VP (you're just a glorified bank teller)
Senior VP (you're just the damn branch manager)
tastes like piss. (as if speaker has tasted it)
like so... like like.. stfu and say what you mean in a concise statement
Post by: GuitarStv on December 01, 2017, 02:07:01 PM
tastes like piss. (as if speaker has tasted it)
Is the speaker a parent of a male child? Let's just say that sometimes late night diaper changes go horribly wrong. . .
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 01, 2017, 03:29:23 PM
*Voila - from voir - look at and la the thing to look at. In other words, look at that.
Post by: Dicey on December 02, 2017, 10:06:13 AM
I’m also not a fan of the DH, DW, DD, DS shortenings for husband, wife, daughter, and son. I think it’s because when I read it, in my head, I’m still hearing “dear (however you are related to me)” and pretty much nobody ever says that out loud or writes that in full.These got me at first, but I'm used to it now, mostly thanks to time spent on this forum. In my head, the "D" is shorthand for "person for whom I have great affection, even if they occasionally annoy the shit out of me." That's a lot of punch for two little letters. Given that this is an anonymous forum, we need a way to readily identify the other characters in the stories of our lives. The letters you listed convey meaning quite effectively. Also, DSD and DSS, because a lot of us have blended families.
There are plenty of words that one uses more in written communication than in casual conversation. There's an idea for a new thread...
And now, one of my one peeves, courtesy of "Hamilton". Rise up. Is there any other direction to rise?
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on December 02, 2017, 11:01:43 AM
I’m also not a fan of the DH, DW, DD, DS shortenings for husband, wife, daughter, and son. I think it’s because when I read it, in my head, I’m still hearing “dear (however you are related to me)” and pretty much nobody ever says that out loud or writes that in full.These got me at first, but I'm used to it now, mostly thanks to time spent on this forum. In my head, the "D" is shorthand for "person for whom I have great affection, even if they occasionally annoy the shit out of me." That's a lot of punch for two little letters. Given that this is an anonymous forum, we need a way to readily identify the other characters in the stories of our lives. The letters you listed convey meaning quite effectively. Also, DSD and DSS, because a lot of us have blended families.
There are plenty of words that one uses more in written communication than in casual conversation. There's an idea for a new thread...
And now, one of my one peeves, courtesy of "Hamilton". Rise up. Is there any other direction to rise?
I figured out what they mean pretty quickly. I don't like the cutesy pie nature of it. I know it's not going away. I am taking a stand and typing out wife every time I need to reference my wife in a post :)
Post by: zolotiyeruki on December 02, 2017, 11:11:33 AM
Hmm, that's interesting, because while it probably originally had the cutesy connotation, those abbreviations have long since (at least to me) shed that feeling, and are now simply a shorthand way of saying "my wife", etc.I’m also not a fan of the DH, DW, DD, DS shortenings for husband, wife, daughter, and son. I think it’s because when I read it, in my head, I’m still hearing “dear (however you are related to me)” and pretty much nobody ever says that out loud or writes that in full.These got me at first, but I'm used to it now, mostly thanks to time spent on this forum. In my head, the "D" is shorthand for "person for whom I have great affection, even if they occasionally annoy the shit out of me." That's a lot of punch for two little letters. Given that this is an anonymous forum, we need a way to readily identify the other characters in the stories of our lives. The letters you listed convey meaning quite effectively. Also, DSD and DSS, because a lot of us have blended families.
There are plenty of words that one uses more in written communication than in casual conversation. There's an idea for a new thread...
And now, one of my one peeves, courtesy of "Hamilton". Rise up. Is there any other direction to rise?
I figured out what they mean pretty quickly. I don't like the cutesy pie nature of it. I know it's not going away. I am taking a stand and typing out wife every time I need to reference my wife in a post :)
Post by: marble_faun on December 03, 2017, 12:33:41 AM
In fact any use of the word "butt" by adults is questionable to me. The word sounds childish and awkward. Not polite, but not satisfyingly vulgar either.
Post by: WootWoot on December 05, 2017, 12:38:10 PM
Example: Joe really got raped on the price of that house he bought.
UGH
Post by: jinga nation on December 05, 2017, 12:39:35 PM
"butt-hurt."do you prefer "ass pain"?
In fact any use of the word "butt" by adults is questionable to me. The word sounds childish and awkward. Not polite, but not satisfyingly vulgar either.
Post by: FrugalToque on December 05, 2017, 01:31:09 PM
The term "rape" when it does not apply to sexual assault.
Example: Joe really got raped on the price of that house he bought.
UGH
Yeah. That one's a no-no around here. We put it in the Forum Rules.
Toque.
Post by: WootWoot on December 05, 2017, 03:30:27 PM
The term "rape" when it does not apply to sexual assault.
Example: Joe really got raped on the price of that house he bought.
UGH
Yeah. That one's a no-no around here. We put it in the Forum Rules.
Toque.
Post by: Davnasty on December 06, 2017, 09:14:07 AM
The term "rape" when it does not apply to sexual assault.I wish I knew how to do away with this one. It's absurdly overused in the business world, at least in my experience but it's so ingrained I don't think you could even explain why it's a problem to some people. Whenever I hear it I feel sick thinking that someone who's been effected by sexual assault might overhear.
Example: Joe really got raped on the price of that house he bought.
UGH
Post by: Laura33 on December 06, 2017, 09:31:14 AM
Hmm, that's interesting, because while it probably originally had the cutesy connotation, those abbreviations have long since (at least to me) shed that feeling, and are now simply a shorthand way of saying "my wife", etc.I’m also not a fan of the DH, DW, DD, DS shortenings for husband, wife, daughter, and son. I think it’s because when I read it, in my head, I’m still hearing “dear (however you are related to me)” and pretty much nobody ever says that out loud or writes that in full.These got me at first, but I'm used to it now, mostly thanks to time spent on this forum. In my head, the "D" is shorthand for "person for whom I have great affection, even if they occasionally annoy the shit out of me." That's a lot of punch for two little letters.
I figured out what they mean pretty quickly. I don't like the cutesy pie nature of it. I know it's not going away. I am taking a stand and typing out wife every time I need to reference my wife in a post :)
Personally, I am quite attached to the "DH" label, because it conveys the precise meaning Dicey provides. I love the ambiguity (i.e., am I saying it straight, or with an implied irony font?). It is pretty rare to find two little letters that can convey so varied a meaning depending on the context.
Besides, typing out "husband" all the time is 75% more inefficient than typing "wife," and 250% more inefficient than "DH." And this board is all about efficiency. ;-)
Post by: Spiritual_Lobotomy on December 06, 2017, 09:44:44 AM
and the present participle or past tense overuse of the word "fuck" (ex. "Can We All Stop This Fucking Complaining About our Government?") to quote MMM
Post by: BlueMR2 on December 11, 2017, 04:47:26 PM
I'm also going to add "team". I'm so tired if getting e-mails that start off with "Team, " that one of these days I'm going to stand up and scream right in the middle of cubeland at work... I can't even stand it when the news reports on "sports teams" anymore because of how abused and overused "team" has become!
Post by: Laura33 on December 12, 2017, 06:24:26 AM
Just say what you mean: "These tiles are bat-shit crazy loud. But your all-white kitchen is boring and sterile and needs some personality. Unfortunately, you don't have any, so let's see if we can fool people into thinking you do by installing something completely insane."
Also, "a pop of color." Ugh.
Yes, I am far too fond of home shows.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on December 12, 2017, 08:09:38 AM
I'm going to nominate "fun," when used to describe a component of interior design. A/k/a "these tiles with the giant neon-blue-and-orange geometric pattern are so fun!"I used to watch more of those, but they tend to focus more on the finishes and decoration, rather than the structure and quality, so I quickly get bored. Not to mention the outrageously overpriced (and ugly!) decor they choose. Seriously, it seems like attractiveness is negatively correlated with price.
Just say what you mean: "These tiles are bat-shit crazy loud. But your all-white kitchen is boring and sterile and needs some personality. Unfortunately, you don't have any, so let's see if we can fool people into thinking you do by installing something completely insane."
Also, "a pop of color." Ugh.
Yes, I am far too fond of home shows.
Post by: Dicey on December 12, 2017, 05:48:36 PM
I hate "a pop of color", "put our stamp on it", with "high-end finishes", because the old, perfectly suitable stuff is "not our style". Ugh, gag. I also hate all decor that exists just because it "stands out" because "buyers are gonna love it". And don't get me started on mid-century modern. Nonetheless, we watch that stuff way too much.I'm going to nominate "fun," when used to describe a component of interior design. A/k/a "these tiles with the giant neon-blue-and-orange geometric pattern are so fun!"I used to watch more of those, but they tend to focus more on the finishes and decoration, rather than the structure and quality, so I quickly get bored. Not to mention the outrageously overpriced (and ugly!) decor they choose. Seriously, it seems like attractiveness is negatively correlated with price.
Just say what you mean: "These tiles are bat-shit crazy loud. But your all-white kitchen is boring and sterile and needs some personality. Unfortunately, you don't have any, so let's see if we can fool people into thinking you do by installing something completely insane."
Also, "a pop of color." Ugh.
Yes, I am far too fond of home shows.
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on December 12, 2017, 09:10:29 PM
I'm going to nominate "fun," when used to describe a component of interior design. A/k/a "these tiles with the giant neon-blue-and-orange geometric pattern are so fun!"
Just say what you mean: "These tiles are bat-shit crazy loud. But your all-white kitchen is boring and sterile and needs some personality. Unfortunately, you don't have any, so let's see if we can fool people into thinking you do by installing something completely insane."
Also, "a pop of color." Ugh.
Yes, I am far too fond of home shows.
I don't blame you, you obviously really enjoy them. :P
Post by: FIRE Artist on December 13, 2017, 10:34:54 AM
I will throw mine into the mix. I hate the current use of the word “Maker” to describe anyone and everyone who crafts or builds anything at all. It had a slow build up for me, but just this week the scales tipped when someone described a bunch of engineering students doing their engineering student design competition type things as “Makers”. Ugh. Like nails on a chalkboard.
Curated Pop Up Holiday Maker Market is the new pretentious way to say Juried Christmas Craft Fair.
Post by: GreenSheep on December 13, 2017, 11:21:11 AM
Also, I thought of the conversation above regarding the word "retarded" when I listened to a podcast in which a person of (I think) Indian descent referred to herself and other non-whites repeatedly as a "person of color." But "colored people" is definitely not okay to say. That's fine, I'm happy to use whatever term people feel comfortable with and do my best to avoid those that are offensive, but the English language is so weird. Does this sort of thing happen in other languages?
Post by: ketchup on December 13, 2017, 12:42:38 PM
That reminds me, one magazine in particular that I read always says "made this photograph" rather than "took this photograph." I guess they're trying to emphasize the fact that there's more work/talent involved in photography than just pushing a button, and I totally get that, but it sounds awfully pretentious to me. Is anyone else seeing this?I've never heard such a thing, and my GF is a pro photographer. It does sound pretentious as hell. Photographers and "photographers" can be an interesting breed.
Post by: kamille on December 17, 2017, 12:57:38 AM
Vulnerable
Entitlement
Fetus
Transgender
Evidence-based
Science-based
Post by: zolotiyeruki on December 17, 2017, 11:39:26 AM
DiversityI had no idea The Donald hung out around here!
Vulnerable
Entitlement
Fetus
Transgender
Evidence-based
Science-based
Post by: Morning Glory on December 17, 2017, 12:22:57 PM
Post by: Kris on December 17, 2017, 01:07:37 PM
My first reaction was being surprised that "global warming" and "climate change" didn't make the list.
That’s because it’s the CDC.
“Climate change” was banned last March.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/energy-department-climate-change-phrases-banned-236655
Post by: ketchup on December 18, 2017, 09:22:16 AM
Post by: soccerluvof4 on December 19, 2017, 04:47:13 AM
Post by: GreenSheep on December 19, 2017, 08:24:04 AM
I can see how this might be spoken rapidly so that the "ed" is sort of skipped over (Maybe. Even that is a stretch.), but I've even seen people write it this way!
Post by: marielle on December 19, 2017, 09:28:45 AM
"She text me and said she wanted to meet for lunch." Instead of "texted."
I can see how this might be spoken rapidly so that the "ed" is sort of skipped over (Maybe. Even that is a stretch.), but I've even seen people write it this way!
Sounds like AAVE, which is just as legitimate as any other language/dialect and has consistent grammar rules.
Unless it was a white person saying it then...not cool.
https://www.hawaii.edu/satocenter/langnet/definitions/aave.html
Quote
The verb in AAVE is often used without any ending. As is the case with the English creoles, there are some separate words that come before the verb which show when or how something happens. These are called "tense/aspect markers".
Past tense:
Past tense may be conveyed by the surrounding discourse (with the help of adverbials such as, for example, "last night", "three years ago", "back in them days", etc., or by the use of conjunctions which convey a sequence of actions (e.g. "then"), or by the use of an ending as in standard English. The frequency with which the -ed ending occurs depends on a number of factors including the sounds which follow it.
Post by: jinga nation on December 19, 2017, 10:22:17 AM
I will throw mine into the mix. I hate the current use of the word “Maker” to describe anyone and everyone who crafts or builds anything at all. It had a slow build up for me, but just this week the scales tipped when someone described a bunch of engineering students doing their engineering student design competition type things as “Makers”. Ugh. Like nails on a chalkboard.As an engineer, I look at this from a historical perspective. Looking back a few decades, a larger percentage of the US population worked in industries, small to large, to make things. Those people had profession names e.g carpenter, or were labelled "factory workers". A lot of that manufacturing is gone and we have a service/gig economy. So those who make are "makers" and those who spend unnecessarily are "idiots".
Curated Pop Up Holiday Maker Market is the new pretentious way to say Juried Christmas Craft Fair.
But yes, the term "maker" is ludicrous.
Post by: GreenSheep on December 19, 2017, 10:29:54 AM
"She text me and said she wanted to meet for lunch." Instead of "texted."
I can see how this might be spoken rapidly so that the "ed" is sort of skipped over (Maybe. Even that is a stretch.), but I've even seen people write it this way!
Sounds like AAVE, which is just as legitimate as any other language/dialect and has consistent grammar rules.
Unless it was a white person saying it then...not cool.
https://www.hawaii.edu/satocenter/langnet/definitions/aave.htmlQuoteThe verb in AAVE is often used without any ending. As is the case with the English creoles, there are some separate words that come before the verb which show when or how something happens. These are called "tense/aspect markers".
Past tense:
Past tense may be conveyed by the surrounding discourse (with the help of adverbials such as, for example, "last night", "three years ago", "back in them days", etc., or by the use of conjunctions which convey a sequence of actions (e.g. "then"), or by the use of an ending as in standard English. The frequency with which the -ed ending occurs depends on a number of factors including the sounds which follow it.
The only times I've heard/read it, it's been said/written by a white person.
Post by: Paul der Krake on December 19, 2017, 10:31:48 AM
#disruptallthethings
#sorrynotsorry
Post by: Kris on December 19, 2017, 10:39:22 AM
"She text me and said she wanted to meet for lunch." Instead of "texted."
I can see how this might be spoken rapidly so that the "ed" is sort of skipped over (Maybe. Even that is a stretch.), but I've even seen people write it this way!
Sounds like AAVE, which is just as legitimate as any other language/dialect and has consistent grammar rules.
Unless it was a white person saying it then...not cool.
https://www.hawaii.edu/satocenter/langnet/definitions/aave.htmlQuoteThe verb in AAVE is often used without any ending. As is the case with the English creoles, there are some separate words that come before the verb which show when or how something happens. These are called "tense/aspect markers".
Past tense:
Past tense may be conveyed by the surrounding discourse (with the help of adverbials such as, for example, "last night", "three years ago", "back in them days", etc., or by the use of conjunctions which convey a sequence of actions (e.g. "then"), or by the use of an ending as in standard English. The frequency with which the -ed ending occurs depends on a number of factors including the sounds which follow it.
The only times I've heard/read it, it's been said/written by a white person.
Most of the time, me too, though I have seen a few black friends use it.
Post by: Travis on December 19, 2017, 06:00:01 PM
"To tell you the truth..."
Were you planning on doing otherwise in this conversation?
Post by: pegleglolita on December 20, 2017, 01:37:05 PM
Your/You're
Their/They're
Its/It's
and FFS stop using apostrophes when you are making a word plural! God, its one of the thing's that make's me want to claw my eye's out. :D
Post by: Kris on December 20, 2017, 03:14:38 PM
Anything used incorrectly:
Your/You're
Their/They're
Its/It's
and FFS stop using apostrophes when you are making a word plural! God, its one of the thing's that make's me want to claw my eye's out. :D
Especially fucking egregious during the holiday season, when one starts to receive Christmas cards from the Johnson's, the Smith's, etc... *head explodes*
Post by: SmokeySnow on December 21, 2017, 01:42:59 AM
Post by: EricL on December 21, 2017, 01:51:23 AM
Anything used incorrectly:
Your/You're
Their/They're
Its/It's
and FFS stop using apostrophes when you are making a word plural! God, its one of the thing's that make's me want to claw my eye's out. :D
Especially fucking egregious during the holiday season, when one starts to receive Christmas cards from the Johnson's, the Smith's, etc... *head explodes*
I'm probably guilty of this a lot due to iPhone autocorrect. And it annoys me as much as it annoys anyone if I go over something I wrote. That said, this, though already posted, could be the medicine people on this thread need:
https://markmanson.net/not-giving-a-fuck (https://markmanson.net/not-giving-a-fuck)
Post by: pegleglolita on December 21, 2017, 04:35:47 PM
Post by: Kris on December 21, 2017, 04:41:13 PM
Also, can we put a stake through the dark heart of letters addressed to "Mr. and Mrs. (Man's first and last name)". For the love of Hera, what frilling year is this. Caveat: if you are over the age of 75, I will forgive your sins.
Lol yeah, my mother-in-law still does this (of course). I cringe and try to keep my eyes from rolling out of their sockets.
Post by: FIRE Artist on December 21, 2017, 04:42:29 PM
Also, can we put a stake through the dark heart of letters addressed to "Mr. and Mrs. (Man's first and last name)". For the love of Hera, what frilling year is this. Caveat: if you are over the age of 75, I will forgive your sins.
I remember my mom commenting on how terribly dismissive a practice this was back when I was a kid, and she is 75 today, so I would raise that age limit a bit.
Post by: Kris on December 21, 2017, 04:45:39 PM
Also, can we put a stake through the dark heart of letters addressed to "Mr. and Mrs. (Man's first and last name)". For the love of Hera, what frilling year is this. Caveat: if you are over the age of 75, I will forgive your sins.
I remember my mom commenting on how terribly dismissive a practice this was back when I was a kid, and she is 75 today, so I would raise that age limit a bit.
Yeah, you might be right. I remember my mom doing it when I was little, and then stopping sometime maybe in my early teens. She would be 75 today.
Also, my MIL is a Jehovah's Witness, so...
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 22, 2017, 01:20:05 AM
Also, can we put a stake through the dark heart of letters addressed to "Mr. and Mrs. (Man's first and last name)". For the love of Hera, what frilling year is this. Caveat: if you are over the age of 75, I will forgive your sins.
This is profoundly annoying, but the only person I know who does it (also the only person who regularly writes me letters!) is my 90-year-old grandmother. The thing that exacerbates it is that nine times out of ten, the letter inside is to "Dear MyFirstName" and is solely written to me, perhaps with a "Give my love to HusbandsFirstName" as a P.S. If the letter is FOR me, why not just ADDRESS it to me?!
Post by: marielle on December 22, 2017, 06:42:59 AM
Also, can we put a stake through the dark heart of letters addressed to "Mr. and Mrs. (Man's first and last name)". For the love of Hera, what frilling year is this. Caveat: if you are over the age of 75, I will forgive your sins.
I remember my mom commenting on how terribly dismissive a practice this was back when I was a kid, and she is 75 today, so I would raise that age limit a bit.
I know a couple in their 20s, maybe early 30s that just got married and their wedding invitation said "Mr. and Mrs. John Smith". It did have their full names somewhere else at least. It also had the parent's names. I thought it was pretty weird, but maybe it's the norm if you're having a religious ceremony. They are Catholic.
Post by: ketchup on December 22, 2017, 06:56:08 AM
The last wedding I went to was very Catholic and churchy to the extreme, and the wedding invitation actually said "[bride first name] and [groom first name]" in that order and that's it. I wouldn't chalk it up solely as a religious thing.Also, can we put a stake through the dark heart of letters addressed to "Mr. and Mrs. (Man's first and last name)". For the love of Hera, what frilling year is this. Caveat: if you are over the age of 75, I will forgive your sins.
I remember my mom commenting on how terribly dismissive a practice this was back when I was a kid, and she is 75 today, so I would raise that age limit a bit.
I know a couple in their 20s, maybe early 30s that just got married and their wedding invitation said "Mr. and Mrs. John Smith". It did have their full names somewhere else at least. It also had the parent's names. I thought it was pretty weird, but maybe it's the norm if you're having a religious ceremony. They are Catholic.
Post by: GuitarStv on December 22, 2017, 01:26:43 PM
Post by: wick on December 22, 2017, 07:17:24 PM
Post by: Davnasty on December 23, 2017, 08:11:40 PM
The word "Hustle" makes me physically gag.
As in "side hustle", taking advantage of someone through misdirection, moving quickly, other?
Or do you mean you just don't like the word in any context?
Also, I'm not a big fan of scrumptious.
Post by: 2Birds1Stone on December 24, 2017, 01:44:46 AM
Post by: Roadrunner53 on December 26, 2017, 08:18:48 AM
In your wheelhouse
Post by: PlainsWalker on December 26, 2017, 01:05:58 PM
In a conference call recently the speaker said p->q and then to illustrate their point said "conversely" and then stated the contrapositive !q->!p. The two propositions were meant to be logically equivalent so they meant contrapositively instead of conversely. They just lost part of their audience while I squared up what they said with what they meant.
Math nerd problems.
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on January 02, 2018, 01:39:01 AM
Also, can we put a stake through the dark heart of letters addressed to "Mr. and Mrs. (Man's first and last name)". For the love of Hera, what frilling year is this. Caveat: if you are over the age of 75, I will forgive your sins.
This is profoundly annoying, but the only person I know who does it (also the only person who regularly writes me letters!) is my 90-year-old grandmother. The thing that exacerbates it is that nine times out of ten, the letter inside is to "Dear MyFirstName" and is solely written to me, perhaps with a "Give my love to HusbandsFirstName" as a P.S. If the letter is FOR me, why not just ADDRESS it to me?!
My grandmother is 86 and this is her all over.
Post by: soccerluvof4 on January 02, 2018, 04:11:43 AM
Post by: Dave1442397 on January 02, 2018, 05:33:31 AM
Anything used incorrectly:
Your/You're
Their/They're
Its/It's
and FFS stop using apostrophes when you are making a word plural! God, its one of the thing's that make's me want to claw my eye's out. :D
Especially fucking egregious during the holiday season, when one starts to receive Christmas cards from the Johnson's, the Smith's, etc... *head explodes*
Yes! We get a couple of those cards every year, and it makes me want to pick up the phone and yell at them.
Post by: Dicey on January 02, 2018, 07:07:47 AM
*Dilly Dilly*What does this mean? Dilly-dally, perhaps?
Post by: Kris on January 02, 2018, 07:11:45 AM
*Dilly Dilly*What does this mean? Dilly-dally, perhaps?
Google is your friend here.
Post by: tralfamadorian on January 02, 2018, 07:14:03 AM
Post by: Kris on January 02, 2018, 08:11:34 AM
I had to google it too.
They play the commercial during sportball games. I would never have seen it except my husband likes watching football.
Post by: Dicey on January 02, 2018, 08:55:45 AM
Thank you for your helpful responses. If it's in reference to a television commercial, that explains why I have no idea what it is. I think I'll keep it that way.I had to google it too.
They play the commercial during sportball games. I would never have seen it except my husband likes watching football.
Post by: Stachey on January 06, 2018, 12:53:42 PM
He meant it as a short form of "Just kidding."
I didn't think I could hate the expression 'just kidding' anymore than I already did. I was wrong.
Post by: soccerluvof4 on January 07, 2018, 06:43:37 AM
Post by: ketchup on January 08, 2018, 09:21:47 AM
Were gonna "make it our own" in remodeling shows. Or " we need to have a space because we entertain alot" Ever notice everyone on those shows entertains alot? I love those shows but they are really unrealistic in so many ways especially what they get some of those projects done for.My favorite was watching one of those shows (years ago, no idea which one) and they kept saying things like "This would be a great place to sit and drink lemonade." Always lemonade. Are they not allowed to talk about alcohol? Or do all these people really like lemonade that much?
Post by: Travis on January 08, 2018, 01:07:05 PM
Were gonna "make it our own" in remodeling shows. Or " we need to have a space because we entertain alot" Ever notice everyone on those shows entertains alot? I love those shows but they are really unrealistic in so many ways especially what they get some of those projects done for.My favorite was watching one of those shows (years ago, no idea which one) and they kept saying things like "This would be a great place to sit and drink lemonade." Always lemonade. Are they not allowed to talk about alcohol? Or do all these people really like lemonade that much?
"I need a north-facing bedroom so the morning sun doesn't interfere with my hangovers" doesn't translate well on Home & Garden Television.
I'm tired of hearing about people's housing "non-negotiables" and "must-haves." Either the producers force them to come up with a few or none of them have any idea that you can't house-hunt off of a menu. Compromise and negotiation is part of the process. Especially when you're operating within a tight budget.
Post by: ketchup on January 08, 2018, 02:01:36 PM
I love when they talk about the couple being on a "tight budget" and then $700,000 flashes across the screen...Were gonna "make it our own" in remodeling shows. Or " we need to have a space because we entertain alot" Ever notice everyone on those shows entertains alot? I love those shows but they are really unrealistic in so many ways especially what they get some of those projects done for.My favorite was watching one of those shows (years ago, no idea which one) and they kept saying things like "This would be a great place to sit and drink lemonade." Always lemonade. Are they not allowed to talk about alcohol? Or do all these people really like lemonade that much?
"I need a north-facing bedroom so the morning sun doesn't interfere with my hangovers" doesn't translate well on Home & Garden Television.
I'm tired of hearing about people's housing "non-negotiables" and "must-haves." Either the producers force them to come up with a few or none of them have any idea that you can't house-hunt off of a menu. Compromise and negotiation is part of the process. Especially when you're operating within a tight budget.
Post by: Travis on January 08, 2018, 02:30:01 PM
I love when they talk about the couple being on a "tight budget" and then $700,000 flashes across the screen...Were gonna "make it our own" in remodeling shows. Or " we need to have a space because we entertain alot" Ever notice everyone on those shows entertains alot? I love those shows but they are really unrealistic in so many ways especially what they get some of those projects done for.My favorite was watching one of those shows (years ago, no idea which one) and they kept saying things like "This would be a great place to sit and drink lemonade." Always lemonade. Are they not allowed to talk about alcohol? Or do all these people really like lemonade that much?
"I need a north-facing bedroom so the morning sun doesn't interfere with my hangovers" doesn't translate well on Home & Garden Television.
I'm tired of hearing about people's housing "non-negotiables" and "must-haves." Either the producers force them to come up with a few or none of them have any idea that you can't house-hunt off of a menu. Compromise and negotiation is part of the process. Especially when you're operating within a tight budget.
One of them "must have" all granite countertops while the other "must have" their "following their dreams" workspace plus room for their big screen TV, three vehicles, and they're DINKs with a combined $60k/year in a neighborhood where $250k is the starting price for that much square footage.
Post by: soccerluvof4 on January 10, 2018, 01:42:47 PM
I love when they talk about the couple being on a "tight budget" and then $700,000 flashes across the screen...Were gonna "make it our own" in remodeling shows. Or " we need to have a space because we entertain alot" Ever notice everyone on those shows entertains alot? I love those shows but they are really unrealistic in so many ways especially what they get some of those projects done for.My favorite was watching one of those shows (years ago, no idea which one) and they kept saying things like "This would be a great place to sit and drink lemonade." Always lemonade. Are they not allowed to talk about alcohol? Or do all these people really like lemonade that much?
"I need a north-facing bedroom so the morning sun doesn't interfere with my hangovers" doesn't translate well on Home & Garden Television.
I'm tired of hearing about people's housing "non-negotiables" and "must-haves." Either the producers force them to come up with a few or none of them have any idea that you can't house-hunt off of a menu. Compromise and negotiation is part of the process. Especially when you're operating within a tight budget.
One of them "must have" all granite countertops while the other "must have" their "following their dreams" workspace plus room for their big screen TV, three vehicles, and they're DINKs with a combined $60k/year in a neighborhood where $250k is the starting price for that much square footage.
haha....And ten acres fenced in for our dogs to run.
Post by: LaineyAZ on January 20, 2018, 02:03:33 PM
Dumbing down communication to make texting faster is one thing, but when professionals start talking like this? Ugh.
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on January 20, 2018, 11:29:29 PM
Heard "emerg" for emergency room. From a TVjournalistpresenter reporting on a celebrity who overdosed and he had to go to the emerg.
Dumbing down communication to make texting faster is one thing, but when professionals start talking like this? Ugh.
FTFY
Post by: WootWoot on February 01, 2018, 11:50:37 AM
Here's one. My brother frequently says "at this point in time". Every damn time, my wacko brain says, "What about this point in space?" Then my brain links "What about time?" and "What about space?" and the next thing you know the theme song from an obscure one-season TV show called "It's About Time" starts playing in my head.
"It's about time
It's about space
About two men in the strangest place"
The funny thing about that is that we all used to sing it as:
"It's about time
It's about space
It's about time to slap your face"
Maybe my brain is smarter (and funnier) than I give it credit for.
Here's a link for you, but don't say I didn't warn you. It's pure drivel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1G-TsdNWGg
My husband sings that ditty every now and then. He says that show was really awful! LOL
Here are the words I could live without:
adulting
Netflix and chill (Like, how did this become a euphemism for sex? How?!)
Post by: Jouer on February 01, 2018, 01:10:23 PM
But Netlix and Chill. *snickers* So much fun.
Post by: Freckles on February 01, 2018, 04:00:05 PM
Netflix and chill (Like, how did this become a euphemism for sex? How?!)
Teenagers.
Post by: deek on February 02, 2018, 03:42:33 PM
- When attention hungry people on social media say, "I did a thing"
- "Snowflake"
- "AF"
- "Savage"
- "Fire"
- "Unpack" when analyzing something complex
And basically everything someone under 23 says on a daily basis (generalizing of course), but you catch my drift
Post by: Roadrunner53 on February 02, 2018, 04:10:35 PM
Post by: Mac_MacGyver on February 02, 2018, 05:46:09 PM
Post by: fuzzy math on February 02, 2018, 06:59:32 PM
Eckspecially (how my coworker pronounces especially)
Post by: Morning Glory on February 02, 2018, 08:18:33 PM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on February 02, 2018, 09:51:07 PM
- "Woke"(emphasis mine) Um, you *do* realize what sort of forum you're visiting here, right? :P
- When attention hungry people on social media say, "I did a thing"
- "Snowflake"
- "AF"
- "Savage"
- "Fire"
- "Unpack" when analyzing something complex
Post by: calimom on February 03, 2018, 10:51:39 AM
Ridiculous when a 55 year old refers to a very close friend: "my bestie"
Post by: a-scho on February 03, 2018, 11:06:18 PM
woke
sammie(i like it as a name, not as "sandwich")
anyhoo
bruh
prolly
i did not know "netflix and chill" really meant "sex". reminds me how, starting in my twenties, I had no clue that "wanna come in for a drink?" really meant "sex". Everytime, I was honestly surprised when they would lunge at me once I was in their apartment. I'm now in my forties and just figured out, like, last year, :) what they were really offering. Guess I took things way too literally. Apparently, I still do. :/
Post by: WootWoot on February 04, 2018, 02:43:04 PM
Adorable when a 5 year old refers to a very close friend: "my bestie"
Ridiculous when a 55 year old refers to a very close friend: "my bestie"
Post by: calimom on February 05, 2018, 02:44:12 PM
Oh dear. My best friend calls me her bestie (on social media). I call her my BFF.Adorable when a 5 year old refers to a very close friend: "my bestie"
Ridiculous when a 55 year old refers to a very close friend: "my bestie"
How old is she, @WootWoot? I'd be inclined to give her a break on this so long as she doesn't use "peeps" or "posse" when suggesting a group get together at a TGIF for happy hour. She'd have to be cited.
Post by: Freckles on February 05, 2018, 10:16:09 PM
Post by: WootWoot on February 08, 2018, 04:09:08 PM
Oh dear. My best friend calls me her bestie (on social media). I call her my BFF.Adorable when a 5 year old refers to a very close friend: "my bestie"
Ridiculous when a 55 year old refers to a very close friend: "my bestie"
How old is she, @WootWoot? I'd be inclined to give her a break on this so long as she doesn't use "peeps" or "posse" when suggesting a group get together at a TGIF for happy hour. She'd have to be cited.
Umm...we're both in our early 50s.
Post by: NoraLenderbee on February 12, 2018, 03:02:15 PM
"It is an emergent illness." The illness is popping up from a hole in the ground?
"The patient's condition is emergent." Oh, the patient is coming out of the closet?
Post by: shelivesthedream on February 13, 2018, 02:19:03 AM
Post by: Davnasty on February 13, 2018, 06:25:35 AM
"Legitimately" used as some kind of intensifier, I think. "I legitimately cannot think of a reason why anyone would do this." Presumably it's some kind of workaround for all the hatred incurred by words like "literally"?
Sounds weird but I'm ok with it as long as people stop using 'literally' when they mean THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF LITERALLY.
Post by: Davnasty on February 13, 2018, 07:32:50 AM
1. At the end of the day...
2. When a male athlete is talking to a female reporter, and says, "Man, I just..." Dude, she is not a man. She's right in front of you. It's actually gotten worse. Now the female athletes are doing it, too.
You know when people say something like. "Aw, man. That sucks" It's that kind of "Man"
Post by: ncornilsen on February 13, 2018, 10:07:03 PM
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on February 14, 2018, 10:29:04 AM
After watching the olympics figure skating, i could go a lifetime without hearing 'the feels' ever again.
For reals.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on February 14, 2018, 01:10:15 PM
After watching the olympics figure skating, i could go a lifetime without hearing 'the feels' ever again.
What does that mean or refer to???
Post by: ncornilsen on February 14, 2018, 01:39:52 PM
After watching the olympics figure skating, i could go a lifetime without hearing 'the feels' ever again.
What does that mean or refer to???
One of the commenters kept using that phrase over and over again about how "emotional" or whatever a particular routine was.
Post by: sixup on February 18, 2018, 06:38:48 AM
I've developed a strong hate for this phrase. It's a weird east coast thing. Makes no sense, and makes me cringe when I hear it.
Post by: WootWoot on February 18, 2018, 10:08:34 AM
I got an email from a company selling daily planners and the subject line was "Planners gonna plan."
<barf>
Post by: Miss Piggy on February 18, 2018, 10:51:30 AM
"Not for nothing, but..."
I've developed a strong hate for this phrase. It's a weird east coast thing. Makes no sense, and makes me cringe when I hear it.
Interesting. I live in the Midwest, and I have never heard this phrase. I would hate it, too!
Post by: Kris on February 18, 2018, 01:11:28 PM
"Not for nothing, but..."
I've developed a strong hate for this phrase. It's a weird east coast thing. Makes no sense, and makes me cringe when I hear it.
Yeah. The first person I ever heard say this, says it ALL THE FREAKING TIME. It doesn't help that this is someone I have grown to strongly dislike.
And yeah. It makes no sense at all.
Ugh.
Post by: iris lily on February 19, 2018, 08:12:03 AM
After watching the olympics figure skating, i could go a lifetime without hearing 'the feels' ever again.
What does that mean or refer to???
One of the commenters kept using that phrase over and over again about how "emotional" or whatever a particular routine was.
Is this from johnny and tara?
I stopped wTching ice skating seriously about the time tara Lipinsky was winning. She was everyones darling, a little jumping bean, but I dont care about the jumps. There wete teenage skaters who could pull off gorgeous, lyrical routines but she wasnt one if them.
Post by: ncornilsen on February 19, 2018, 09:07:16 AM
After watching the olympics figure skating, i could go a lifetime without hearing 'the feels' ever again.
What does that mean or refer to???
One of the commenters kept using that phrase over and over again about how "emotional" or whatever a particular routine was.
Is this from johnny and tara?
I stopped wTching ice skating seriously about the time tara Lipinsky was winning. She was everyones darling, a little jumping bean, but I dont care about the jumps. There wete teenage skaters who could pull off gorgeous, lyrical routines but she wasnt one if them.
Yes, that is who I'm referring to. I don't particulary follow ice skating, it just happened to be what was on for the 45 minutes I watcvh TV in a day. When I first saw tara and johnny, I thought I'd tuned into a hunger games sequel.
Post by: BlueHouse on February 26, 2018, 10:22:37 AM
"Not for nothing, but..."
I've developed a strong hate for this phrase. It's a weird east coast thing. Makes no sense, and makes me cringe when I hear it.
I grew up in NJ. It was always an Italian thing there. Picture Rocky saying it. Or Tony Soprano.
Post by: BlueHouse on February 26, 2018, 10:25:34 AM
Last night I saw Jennifer Lawrence say that she doesn't "technically" have a GED or High School Diploma. Nothing technical about it. She dropped out at 14 and never finished.
I think this started to bother me when a co-worker started saying it whenever he made an error.
Post by: sixup on March 01, 2018, 04:56:25 AM
"Not for nothing, but..."
I've developed a strong hate for this phrase. It's a weird east coast thing. Makes no sense, and makes me cringe when I hear it.
I grew up in NJ. It was always an Italian thing there. Picture Rocky saying it. Or Tony Soprano.
I just heard the CBS new york morning news anchor say it. kill me.
Post by: solon on March 01, 2018, 09:58:19 AM
"Not for nothing, but..."
I've developed a strong hate for this phrase. It's a weird east coast thing. Makes no sense, and makes me cringe when I hear it.
I grew up in NJ. It was always an Italian thing there. Picture Rocky saying it. Or Tony Soprano.
I just heard the CBS new york morning news anchor say it. kill me.
What does "not for nothing" mean? I'm not from the east coast so having trouble figuring it out, beyond just the literal meaning.
Post by: sixup on March 01, 2018, 06:07:47 PM
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on March 02, 2018, 06:41:50 AM
What does "not for nothing" mean? I'm not from the east coast so having trouble figuring it out, beyond just the literal meaning.
I've never heard it, either.
Post by: FIRE Artist on March 02, 2018, 08:56:57 AM
What does "not for nothing" mean? I'm not from the east coast so having trouble figuring it out, beyond just the literal meaning.
I've never heard it, either.
I have only ever heard it used once, and it was from an American friend who works at the White House. She used it when describing how she dropped bad news to her parents - "Not for nothing, but, I have breast cancer..."
I think it is a lead in to brace someone against something that is bad news, or possibly offensive/insulting.
Post by: Mrbeardedbigbucks on March 03, 2018, 04:03:49 AM
I work in an office with a bunch of stiff old white guys who's world revolves around their careers and making children. Whenever one asks how the other is doing a very common response is:
"Living the Dream"
or
"No complaints but if I had any no one would listen anyway"
It's like man, think of something original at least. One time this dude I work closely with threw out the "living the dream" at me and I responded "your dream is my nightmare" and we both got a good laugh although now he doesn't talk to me as much anymore.
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on March 03, 2018, 07:43:57 AM
Maybe this has already been said but I'll throw it out there anyway.
I work in an office with a bunch of stiff old white guys who's world revolves around their careers and making children. Whenever one asks how the other is doing a very common response is:
"Living the Dream"
or
"No complaints but if I had any no one would listen anyway"
It's like man, think of something original at least. One time this dude I work closely with threw out the "living the dream" at me and I responded "your dream is my nightmare" and we both got a good laugh although now he doesn't talk to me as much anymore.
You're my hero :D I hate that defeatist "everything sucks" attitude of guys that use "Living the dream".
Post by: Mrbeardedbigbucks on March 05, 2018, 04:20:42 AM
Maybe this has already been said but I'll throw it out there anyway.
I work in an office with a bunch of stiff old white guys who's world revolves around their careers and making children. Whenever one asks how the other is doing a very common response is:
"Living the Dream"
or
"No complaints but if I had any no one would listen anyway"
It's like man, think of something original at least. One time this dude I work closely with threw out the "living the dream" at me and I responded "your dream is my nightmare" and we both got a good laugh although now he doesn't talk to me as much anymore.
You're my hero :D I hate that defeatist "everything sucks" attitude of guys that use "Living the dream".
If I'm your hero I must be "living the dream".
I'd also like to add "Happy wife, Happy life" to this list. Another common phrase thrown around the office. Just terrible.
Post by: BlueHouse on March 06, 2018, 02:32:15 PM
You're my hero :D I hate that defeatist "everything sucks" attitude of guys that use "Living the dream".
???
I use "Living the dream" in a way that says Life is good. I do know it's origin in office space, but I don't use this phrase in a sarcastic way at all. I Love my life, I've never been happier, and I really am living the american dream. Not defeatist at all.
I also like to say "another day in paradise". Because I am not original at all, and I think some people prefer to hear something other than "fine thank you? How are you?" Which is what I would otherwise say. Every. Day.
Post by: Travis on March 06, 2018, 02:50:49 PM
You're my hero :D I hate that defeatist "everything sucks" attitude of guys that use "Living the dream".
???
I use "Living the dream" in a way that says Life is good. I do know it's origin in office space, but I don't use this phrase in a sarcastic way at all. I Love my life, I've never been happier, and I really am living the american dream. Not defeatist at all.
I also like to say "another day in paradise". Because I am not original at all, and I think some people prefer to hear something other than "fine thank you? How are you?" Which is what I would otherwise say. Every. Day.
I don't think I've ever heard either of those sayings in a non-ironic way. They've always been said by someone who was so "blah" about their day they had nothing articulate or positive to say to describe it or they were thumbing their nose at the motivation they were supposed to be feeling.
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on March 06, 2018, 03:16:48 PM
You're my hero :D I hate that defeatist "everything sucks" attitude of guys that use "Living the dream".
???
I use "Living the dream" in a way that says Life is good. I do know it's origin in office space, but I don't use this phrase in a sarcastic way at all. I Love my life, I've never been happier, and I really am living the american dream. Not defeatist at all.
I also like to say "another day in paradise". Because I am not original at all, and I think some people prefer to hear something other than "fine thank you? How are you?" Which is what I would otherwise say. Every. Day.
Well, you are definitely in the minority with using it in a non-sarcastic way. Every time I've heard someone say "Living the dream...", they are using it exactly the way Mrbeardedbigbucks described it. You might want to be careful how you use that phrase, because I think most people are going to see it as you being negative, even if you don't mean it that way.
Post by: GreenSheep on March 06, 2018, 06:42:20 PM
Post by: sixup on March 07, 2018, 01:51:32 PM
"There's a lot unpack there... blah blah blah"
I've heard it a lot on podcasts. Just seems like a trite, marketing-speak filler phrase.
Post by: soccerluvof4 on March 07, 2018, 03:26:25 PM
Post by: Travis on March 07, 2018, 06:53:02 PM
My Bad... ! like it makes it ok. Dont need to point out when you make a mistake we all know it just move on.
Considering the number of people I've known in my life whose first words after a mistake/accident are "Not my fault!" I enjoy it when somebody owns up to them.
Post by: Mrbeardedbigbucks on March 08, 2018, 04:34:45 AM
You're my hero :D I hate that defeatist "everything sucks" attitude of guys that use "Living the dream".
???
I use "Living the dream" in a way that says Life is good. I do know it's origin in office space, but I don't use this phrase in a sarcastic way at all. I Love my life, I've never been happier, and I really am living the american dream. Not defeatist at all.
I also like to say "another day in paradise". Because I am not original at all, and I think some people prefer to hear something other than "fine thank you? How are you?" Which is what I would otherwise say. Every. Day.
Well, you are definitely in the minority with using it in a non-sarcastic way. Every time I've heard someone say "Living the dream...", they are using it exactly the way Mrbeardedbigbucks described it. You might want to be careful how you use that phrase, because I think most people are going to see it as you being negative, even if you don't mean it that way.
I agree. Even if you are really 'living the dream' and you're very satisfied with your situation in life, when you say that phrase to someone else, usually it's interpreted as sarcastic and you're not that satisfied with the way things are going.
I suppose it could depend on the inflection in your voice and how descriptive you are, like if you headline it with "you know what? I really am living the dream, no complaints at all" but if you just respond with a typical "living the dream man, how about you?", many people will think your life is kind of crappy right now.
I am happy for you bye the way. It's great that you are living your own dream. I think a better response would be an enthusiastic- "I'm friggin' awesome, things couldn't be better, for real" Use that on your next response to someone asking you how you're doing and see what happens.
Post by: Morning Glory on March 08, 2018, 05:25:16 AM
Post by: Mrbeardedbigbucks on March 08, 2018, 09:04:33 AM
"Living the dream" has an even more cringe worthy offshoot: "teamwork makes the dream work" . Just no.
I’ve never heard that phrase before and if I ever do, I’ll immediately jump out the nearest window.
Post by: calimom on March 08, 2018, 10:13:13 AM
"Living the dream" has an even more cringe worthy offshoot: "teamwork makes the dream work" . Just no.
I’ve never heard that phrase before and if I ever do, I’ll immediately jump out the nearest window.
"There's no I in team!"
Post by: Dicey on March 08, 2018, 12:04:06 PM
Totally agree! It seems to show somewhat more ownership than just an apology.My Bad... ! like it makes it ok. Dont need to point out when you make a mistake we all know it just move on.
Considering the number of people I've known in my life whose first words after a mistake/accident are "Not my fault!" I enjoy it when somebody owns up to them.
ETA - It's also useful when you want to own something, but not necessarily apologize. I like the ambiguity, if that makes any sense at all. I've even used it sarcastically, when someone is overreacting to something that isn't my fault at all.
Post by: Dicey on March 08, 2018, 12:09:00 PM
Was it Shaq who added, "...but there is one in win"?"Living the dream" has an even more cringe worthy offshoot: "teamwork makes the dream work" . Just no.
I’ve never heard that phrase before and if I ever do, I’ll immediately jump out the nearest window.
"There's no I in team!"
Post by: zolotiyeruki on March 08, 2018, 01:10:03 PM
Was it Shaq who added, "...but there is one in win"?Also, if you look real hard, there *is* a me in "team".
Post by: Dicey on March 08, 2018, 02:08:30 PM
Ooh, I like this! If I wasn't FIRE, I'd totally use this on my boss. Mustachian People Problem, I guess.Was it Shaq who added, "...but there is one in win"?Also, if you look real hard, there *is* a me in "team".
Post by: Kris on March 08, 2018, 02:33:12 PM
Was it Shaq who added, "...but there is one in win"?Also, if you look real hard, there *is* a me in "team".
Good point!
Reminds me of something my husband loves to say in situations like that:
"It makes sense, if you don't think about it." :D
Post by: Dicey on March 08, 2018, 02:47:28 PM
Love it!Was it Shaq who added, "...but there is one in win"?Also, if you look real hard, there *is* a me in "team".
Good point!
Reminds me of something my husband loves to say in situations like that:
"It makes sense, if you don't think about it." :D
Post by: ketchup on March 12, 2018, 03:12:07 PM
But there is an I in pie, and there's an I in meat pie. Meat is an anagram for team.Was it Shaq who added, "...but there is one in win"?Also, if you look real hard, there *is* a me in "team".
(https://www.premierguitar.com/ext/resources/images/content/2103_08/Blogs/Shaun-of-the-Dead---Meat-Pie_WEB.jpg)
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on March 13, 2018, 01:20:51 AM
But there is an I in pie, and there's an I in meat pie. Meat is an anagram for team.Was it Shaq who added, "...but there is one in win"?Also, if you look real hard, there *is* a me in "team".
(https://www.premierguitar.com/ext/resources/images/content/2103_08/Blogs/Shaun-of-the-Dead---Meat-Pie_WEB.jpg)
Or should that be ‘gh’ for pie?
If GH can stand for P as in ‘hiccough’,
If OUGH can stand for O as in ‘dough’,
if PHTH can stand for T as in ‘phthisis’,
if EIGH can stand for A as in ‘neighbour’,
if TTE can stand for T as in ‘gazette’,
if EAU can stand for O as in ‘plateau’,
…then the correct way to spell potato would be:
GHOUGHPHTHEIGHTTEEAU
(via Grammarly and half my uni lecturers)
Post by: albireo13 on March 13, 2018, 07:42:33 AM
Post by: Morning Glory on March 13, 2018, 08:00:26 AM
Post by: BlueHouse on March 13, 2018, 08:12:20 AM
"There's no I in team!"
(https://i.imgur.com/F6mGA.jpg)
Post by: zolotiyeruki on March 13, 2018, 08:20:56 AM
Something I see on the forum a lot: using gift/gifted as a verb instead of give/gave/given. E.g. "I was gifted a house", or "how to gift money to minors " Can someone give (gift?) me a logical reason for this? Maybe it is regional or something because I have never heard it IRL.I think the idea is that "to gift" is a more specific term than "to give." IOW, "to gift" means "to give as a gift" as opposed to other possible connotations.
Post by: BlueHouse on March 13, 2018, 12:31:10 PM
LOL, I just looked this up, and it seems as if the use of "gift" as a verb became much more popular after the Seinfeld episode about the regifted label maker!Something I see on the forum a lot: using gift/gifted as a verb instead of give/gave/given. E.g. "I was gifted a house", or "how to gift money to minors " Can someone give (gift?) me a logical reason for this? Maybe it is regional or something because I have never heard it IRL.I think the idea is that "to gift" is a more specific term than "to give." IOW, "to gift" means "to give as a gift" as opposed to other possible connotations.
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/is-gifting-a-word?page=1 (https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/is-gifting-a-word?page=1)
In older days, it seems to be more of a reciprocal agreement used for tax purposes.
I guess I see zolotiyeruki's point because you wouldn't say that you gifted someone with Chicken Pox.
Post by: Morning Glory on March 13, 2018, 05:31:49 PM
LOL, I just looked this up, and it seems as if the use of "gift" as a verb became much more popular after the Seinfeld episode about the regifted label maker!Something I see on the forum a lot: using gift/gifted as a verb instead of give/gave/given. E.g. "I was gifted a house", or "how to gift money to minors " Can someone give (gift?) me a logical reason for this? Maybe it is regional or something because I have never heard it IRL.I think the idea is that "to gift" is a more specific term than "to give." IOW, "to gift" means "to give as a gift" as opposed to other possible connotations.
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/is-gifting-a-word?page=1 (https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/is-gifting-a-word?page=1)
In older days, it seems to be more of a reciprocal agreement used for tax purposes.
I guess I see zolotiyeruki's point because you wouldn't say that you gifted someone with Chicken Pox.
I see the logic but I still just don't like it.
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on March 14, 2018, 02:38:31 AM
They included 'shero' (female hero) and 'GOAT' (greatest of all time).
GOAT is common knowledge, and if not, that's what Urban Dictionary is for.
Shero is downright odious.
Post by: marty998 on March 14, 2018, 04:49:28 AM
But there is an I in pie, and there's an I in meat pie. Meat is an anagram for team.Was it Shaq who added, "...but there is one in win"?Also, if you look real hard, there *is* a me in "team".
There's no I in Team, but there's a U in Cun....(I'm so getting banned for this)
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on March 14, 2018, 04:52:09 AM
But there is an I in pie, and there's an I in meat pie. Meat is an anagram for team.Was it Shaq who added, "...but there is one in win"?Also, if you look real hard, there *is* a me in "team".
There's no I in Team, but there's a U in Cun....(I'm so getting banned for this)
I would hope U would be in one...
Post by: Miss Piggy on March 14, 2018, 05:06:37 AM
I can't find the article (blame the empty glass next to me) but I saw a news report this week about new words being added to the dictionary (Macquarie? OED?).
They included 'shero' (female hero) and 'GOAT' (greatest of all time).
GOAT is common knowledge, and if not, that's what Urban Dictionary is for.
Shero is downright odious.
ETA: Oops...my keyboard wouldn't work earlier and I accidentally submitted an "empty" reply. Anyway, what I was going to say is this: I have NEVER seen the GOAT acronym, but I hear shero every once in a while.
Post by: ketchup on March 14, 2018, 07:59:36 AM
Country-music-loving lady?But there is an I in pie, and there's an I in meat pie. Meat is an anagram for team.Was it Shaq who added, "...but there is one in win"?Also, if you look real hard, there *is* a me in "team".
There's no I in Team, but there's a U in Cun....(I'm so getting banned for this)
Post by: solon on March 14, 2018, 08:33:55 AM
Post by: Freckles on March 14, 2018, 10:23:28 AM
Post by: Bearblastbeats on March 14, 2018, 01:31:23 PM
I.e. These new mocha choca dunka latte chinos though.
Post by: chaskavitch on March 14, 2018, 01:50:20 PM
When people use the word though at the end of an already complete sentence.
I.e. These new mocha choca dunka latte chinos though.
So, you're not a fan of Chantho from Doctor Who, then? :)
Post by: Boll weevil on March 14, 2018, 03:02:26 PM
- passion when referring to anything other than human relationships (as in "my job is my passion"
- "it is what it is"
- anytime somebody says they're going to give more than 100% effort
And these aren't words, but
- that fistbump-explosion thing
- putting hands together to make a heart (fingertips in, thumbs down)
Post by: mustachepungoeshere on March 14, 2018, 03:06:25 PM
I can't find the article (blame the empty glass next to me) but I saw a news report this week about new words being added to the dictionary (Macquarie? OED?).
They included 'shero' (female hero) and 'GOAT' (greatest of all time).
GOAT is common knowledge, and if not, that's what Urban Dictionary is for.
Shero is downright odious.
Well said.
Post by: Travis on March 14, 2018, 03:11:22 PM
I've got some more:
- passion when referring to anything other than human relationships (as in "my job is my passion"
I watched an episode of Shark Tank where the panel collectively sighed/laughed when the presenter mentioned their passion for their project having value. I think it was Mark Cuban who said sarcastically "yeah, we've never heard that here before."
Post by: MissNancyPryor on March 14, 2018, 03:12:56 PM
Starting a sentence with"so", as in "so, I said him...."
ENDING every sentence with “so” and the implied ellipses that follow.
Apologies if this was already submitted, so...
Post by: Travis on March 14, 2018, 03:20:29 PM
When people use the word though at the end of an already complete sentence.
I.e. These new mocha choca dunka latte chinos though.
So, you're not a fan of Chantho from Doctor Who, then? :)
Her lab partner murdered her citing her speech patterns as a reason...
Post by: chaskavitch on March 14, 2018, 03:54:48 PM
When people use the word though at the end of an already complete sentence.
I.e. These new mocha choca dunka latte chinos though.
So, you're not a fan of Chantho from Doctor Who, then? :)
Her lab partner murdered her citing her speech patterns as a reason...
You make a very good point.
Post by: Dicey on March 14, 2018, 06:24:08 PM
Post by: calimom on March 14, 2018, 06:47:34 PM
"Resurface" - apparently as in "Oh, you didn't get the email I sent last week? Let me resurface it for you." This from a friend who works at a start-up that anyone with college debt will have heard of. She has a new eye-roller every time I see her.
That could be filed under the "when good words go bad" department.
"Pivot" gets overused now. I read an update from the Board President of an organization I'm connected to. She used it twice in a 3 paragraph message.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on March 14, 2018, 07:19:04 PM
You'll have to blame Obama for that one :P"Resurface" - apparently as in "Oh, you didn't get the email I sent last week? Let me resurface it for you." This from a friend who works at a start-up that anyone with college debt will have heard of. She has a new eye-roller every time I see her.
That could be filed under the "when good words go bad" department.
"Pivot" gets overused now. I read an update from the Board President of an organization I'm connected to. She used it twice in a 3 paragraph message.
Post by: FIRE Artist on March 16, 2018, 10:17:37 AM
Post by: Kris on March 16, 2018, 10:20:25 AM
"Resurface" - apparently as in "Oh, you didn't get the email I sent last week? Let me resurface it for you." This from a friend who works at a start-up that anyone with college debt will have heard of. She has a new eye-roller every time I see her.
Oh my god.
I’ve never heard that. Infuriating.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on March 16, 2018, 10:40:35 AM
Maybe we should replace it with "exhume"!"Resurface" - apparently as in "Oh, you didn't get the email I sent last week? Let me resurface it for you." This from a friend who works at a start-up that anyone with college debt will have heard of. She has a new eye-roller every time I see her.Oh my god.
I’ve never heard that. Infuriating.
I'll admit at first that I took "resurface" to mean "repave," and was very confused...
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 17, 2018, 08:46:05 AM
Maybe we should replace it with "exhume"!"Resurface" - apparently as in "Oh, you didn't get the email I sent last week? Let me resurface it for you." This from a friend who works at a start-up that anyone with college debt will have heard of. She has a new eye-roller every time I see her.Oh my god.
I’ve never heard that. Infuriating.
I'll admit at first that I took "resurface" to mean "repave," and was very confused...
Resurface is repave, but only the surface - to me repaving means going deeper.
Old emails - they could be re-sent maybe? Or if really old, dug out and re-sent?
Post by: Dicey on March 17, 2018, 09:09:33 AM
The term resurface made me think of all the things you cite and more.Maybe we should replace it with "exhume"!"Resurface" - apparently as in "Oh, you didn't get the email I sent last week? Let me resurface it for you." This from a friend who works at a start-up that anyone with college debt will have heard of. She has a new eye-roller every time I see her.Oh my god.
I’ve never heard that. Infuriating.
I'll admit at first that I took "resurface" to mean "repave," and was very confused...
A good chunk of my career was spent in the flooring industry. There is a huge annual trade show in Vegas called "Surfaces". From that marathon, thank God, I have been freed. DH is a Specialty Surfaces Specialist. He resurfaces million gallon reservoirs, among other things. The parking lot at the library needs to be resurfaced and the county says there's no money to pay for it.
What a bunch of pantywaists, pretending that searching for an email is actual physical labor.
Post by: solon on April 10, 2018, 01:37:54 PM
It's all over this forum.
Post by: sui generis on April 10, 2018, 04:50:22 PM
Post by: NoraLenderbee on April 13, 2018, 02:34:31 PM
LOL, I just looked this up, and it seems as if the use of "gift" as a verb became much more popular after the Seinfeld episode about the regifted label maker!Something I see on the forum a lot: using gift/gifted as a verb instead of give/gave/given. E.g. "I was gifted a house", or "how to gift money to minors " Can someone give (gift?) me a logical reason for this? Maybe it is regional or something because I have never heard it IRL.I think the idea is that "to gift" is a more specific term than "to give." IOW, "to gift" means "to give as a gift" as opposed to other possible connotations.
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/is-gifting-a-word?page=1 (https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/is-gifting-a-word?page=1)
In older days, it seems to be more of a reciprocal agreement used for tax purposes.
I guess I see zolotiyeruki's point because you wouldn't say that you gifted someone with Chicken Pox.
I see the logic but I still just don't like it.
It's used to make "give" sound more glamorous. It's stupid and I hate it.
Post by: Miss Piggy on April 13, 2018, 03:07:50 PM
There. I said it. I feel so much better now.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 13, 2018, 03:20:27 PM
I absolutely hate this phrase: "Top is in"
There. I said it. I feel so much better now.
What does this even mean?
Post by: Kris on April 13, 2018, 04:04:48 PM
I absolutely hate this phrase: "Top is in"
There. I said it. I feel so much better now.
What does this even mean?
I want to know, too. I googled it and I still have no idea what it means.
Post by: solon on April 13, 2018, 04:17:21 PM
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/top-is-in/
Post by: Kris on April 13, 2018, 04:19:41 PM
Who are you people? Do you know what forum you're on?
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/top-is-in/
Yeah, when I googled, that was the top result. And I STILL don't get it.
Post by: Miss Piggy on April 13, 2018, 04:30:21 PM
Post by: Miss Piggy on April 13, 2018, 08:32:17 PM
Post by: Davnasty on April 13, 2018, 09:03:49 PM
Who are you people? Do you know what forum you're on?
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/top-is-in/
The bottom is out
Post by: solon on June 05, 2018, 11:14:37 AM
https://pueblo.craigslist.org/cto/d/2000-range-rover-land-rover/6602179372.html
Post by: Davnasty on June 05, 2018, 11:38:46 AM
I think there is enough in here for everyone to be upset about...
https://pueblo.craigslist.org/cto/d/2000-range-rover-land-rover/6602179372.html
Ouch. Where's my red pen.
Post by: Freckles on June 05, 2018, 02:16:06 PM
Post by: Davnasty on June 05, 2018, 02:31:31 PM
"the little woman." UGH UGH UGH
Grammar, spelling, choice of words. It's got everything.
Post by: Dicey on June 06, 2018, 12:01:15 AM
"the little woman." UGH UGH UGH"The ball and chain" DITTO
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 06, 2018, 12:39:52 PM
"the little woman." UGH UGH UGH
Grammar, spelling, choice of words. It's got everything.
Cringe. I regret looking at it. Not an advertisement for whatever schools the seller attended.
Post by: calimom on June 11, 2018, 10:23:12 PM
"the little woman." UGH UGH UGH
Grammar, spelling, choice of words. It's got everything.
Cringe. I regret looking at it. Not an advertisement for whatever schools the seller attended.
Along with hubs, hubby, wifey lil mommy, lil daddy, et al.. Do people really need to refer to their spouses this way?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 18, 2018, 06:43:04 AM
Post by: chaskavitch on June 18, 2018, 07:02:50 AM
I have a new pet peeve. I hate reading a library book where a previous reader has decided to be the editor and "fixed" all the "mistakes".
People DO that?!?!? That's terrible, and terribly annoying.
And now "terrible" looks like some weird mix of "tribble" and "terrier" and it's just some yippy fluffy dog that reproduces every 10 hours. /sigh
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 18, 2018, 07:03:31 AM
"the little woman." UGH UGH UGH
Grammar, spelling, choice of words. It's got everything.
Cringe. I regret looking at it. Not an advertisement for whatever schools the seller attended.
Along with hubs, hubby, wifey lil mommy, lil daddy, et al.. Do people really need to refer to their spouses this way?
Sorry, but when I am referring to my Other Half I refer to him as The Hub. I only do it on websites when referring to him. Not in public.
Post by: ender on June 18, 2018, 07:15:24 AM
Post by: sui generis on June 18, 2018, 09:47:05 AM
For some reason, I have an irrational dislike of DH/DW/DD/DS and all their variants.Me too! I thought I was the only one...
Post by: Nicholas Carter on June 18, 2018, 09:54:50 AM
Netflix and chill (Like, how did this become a euphemism for sex? How?!)So what happens is, you invite someone over to see a movie, and while they are there, "maybe" one of you will initiate sex with the other. In much the same mold as "Would you like to come up and see my records?"
In my experience, it means something like "I don't expect this to work" or "I don't think you're going to listen to me." or "I'm just saying." So:"Not for nothing, but..."
I've developed a strong hate for this phrase. It's a weird east coast thing. Makes no sense, and makes me cringe when I hear it.
What does "not for nothing" mean? I'm not from the east coast so having trouble figuring it out, beyond just the literal meaning.
"Not for nothing, but I think this project is pointless."
"Not for nothing, but that's the worst possible dress you could have come to this party in."
Apparently the original source is a poem, in which the meaning is literal "I am not doing this for nothing, attend to my reasoning. It's a good reason." and its common use is somewhat sarcastic, in light of the fact that if you have to tell someone "For a good reason, don't date that guy." instead of just "Don't date that guy." then they're probably not going to listen to begin with.
Post by: Rogue on June 18, 2018, 10:01:04 AM
Post by: sui generis on June 18, 2018, 10:11:01 AM
Post by: shelivesthedream on June 18, 2018, 11:40:41 AM
I also have an irrational negative reaction to this new thing everyone is doing in emails where they say "I'm moving Jim to BCC to save his inbox." I was telling my BF about it, and he was like, "that's so clever, I might start doing that now!" and I was rankled even more. I actually understand and agree, and see the efficiency of it, but somehow there's just something very...I can't find the right word, but sycophantic or showy or something about it, the way it is phrased vs. the efficiency of the technique. I think I'm going overboard with it, but I still shudder at it the way a lot of people shudder at the word "moist."
I don't understand how this works or what this means. Please would you explain? (I do know what BCC is.)
Post by: sui generis on June 18, 2018, 11:53:13 AM
BCC is the same as blind copy. It's an option, in addition to the cc field, on an email. And sorry if this is going into even too much detail, but it lets you send a copy of a message to someone (in the bcc field) without anyone in the To or cc field knowing. One of the important things to note when using the bcc field is that if any of the people in the To or cc field reply to your email (where you bcc'd someone else), the person you bcc'd will not be included (which makes total sense).I also have an irrational negative reaction to this new thing everyone is doing in emails where they say "I'm moving Jim to BCC to save his inbox." I was telling my BF about it, and he was like, "that's so clever, I might start doing that now!" and I was rankled even more. I actually understand and agree, and see the efficiency of it, but somehow there's just something very...I can't find the right word, but sycophantic or showy or something about it, the way it is phrased vs. the efficiency of the technique. I think I'm going overboard with it, but I still shudder at it the way a lot of people shudder at the word "moist."
I don't understand how this works or what this means. Please would you explain? (I do know what BCC is.)
So sometimes there are a ton of people on an email, and it's going back and forth, continuing to copy everybody and their mother, when really only like two or three of the people need to be continuing to be connected to the conversation. So, mostly as a courtesy to those that don't need to be on the email but keep getting pinged and having to spend time seeing if they need to pay attention to it, someone says, "I'm going to move Jim (and everybody else and their mothers) to BCC to save his inbox." This lets Jim know what's happening without suddenly cutting him out (which could be a good idea in certain situations) as well as everyone else, and is a courtesy for Jim since he won't get anymore emails on this topic that is irrelevant to him (because when anyone else replies again, he won't be included since he was blind copied on the last one).
Both my work and volunteer lives are like this - with anywhere between 5 and 30 people on an email and a chain gets specific enough that most don't need to be on it anymore. I mean, it makes a ton of sense to do it, actually. It's just that somehow the phrasing of it feels gross to me. Something about the "to save his inbox" that I am having an allergic reaction to. And I swear I get this multiple times per day now, starting only like a month ago. It became a THING so fast and everyone's using it as much as possible!
Post by: shelivesthedream on June 20, 2018, 12:00:18 AM
Quote
(because when anyone else replies again, he won't be included since he was blind copied on the last one)
Aha! I get it now! This is the bit that hadn't occurred to me. Agreed that it is clever but "to save his inbox" is really ew. It strikes me as slightly infantilising for some reason. Like, "Who's a poor widdle inbox then, eh?". It also ticks me off a bit that people would just do it without asking Jim first. Maybe he likes knowing what's going on in the thread!
Post by: LaineyAZ on June 22, 2018, 08:51:15 AM
I just dislike that wishy washy way of talking - just say what you want to say.
Post by: ketchup on June 22, 2018, 09:43:00 AM
Adding "right?" at the end of sentences. I was listening to the radio where a guest was describing some factual events, and every few sentences she added the word right as a question. Not sure whether she was gauging whether her host agreed with her, or was following what she was saying, or what.It could be a regional thing. My sister-in-law spent a year in Australia and came back adding "yeah?" onto the end of half her statements in the same way.
I just dislike that wishy washy way of talking - just say what you want to say.
Post by: Davnasty on June 22, 2018, 10:03:59 AM
Adding "right?" at the end of sentences. I was listening to the radio where a guest was describing some factual events, and every few sentences she added the word right as a question. Not sure whether she was gauging whether her host agreed with her, or was following what she was saying, or what.It could be a regional thing. My sister-in-law spent a year in Australia and came back adding "yeah?" onto the end of half her statements in the same way.
I just dislike that wishy washy way of talking - just say what you want to say.
Either of those are much more forgivable than "you know what I mean?". If you're really asking the question as in "this is a complex explanation, do you understand it" that's fine, but as a way to end a sentence it's just painful. Are you actually asking me to respond yes or no every time?
Funny thing is the few people I've know to talk like this I disagreed with on a lot of lifestyle choices so no, I often did not know what they meant.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 22, 2018, 10:13:03 AM
Adding "right?" at the end of sentences. I was listening to the radio where a guest was describing some factual events, and every few sentences she added the word right as a question. Not sure whether she was gauging whether her host agreed with her, or was following what she was saying, or what.It could be a regional thing. My sister-in-law spent a year in Australia and came back adding "yeah?" onto the end of half her statements in the same way.
I just dislike that wishy washy way of talking - just say what you want to say.
In Canada it is "eh"- it's a bonding thing, eh?
Post by: Morning Glory on June 22, 2018, 10:13:37 AM
One more thing: I get annoyed when people say that babies are "flirting" when they smile or make eye contact. There has to be another word for this.
Post by: Kris on June 22, 2018, 10:33:02 AM
These type of sentence enders are similar to raising the pitch at the end, to make it sound like a question. It does make the speaker sound immature or indecisive.
One more thing: I get annoyed when people say that babies are "flirting" when they smile or make eye contact. There has to be another word for this.
I've never heard that before. Ew.
Post by: Dave1442397 on June 22, 2018, 11:20:28 AM
"We're sort of changing how we deal with our customers." Well, are you changing it, or not?
I ended up muting one guy, he said it so often.
Post by: solon on June 22, 2018, 11:26:50 AM
I had to listen to the CEO and some VPs on a video conference, and what was driving me crazy was that they kept saying they were "sort of" doing things.
"We're sort of changing how we deal with our customers." Well, are you changing it, or not?
I ended up muting one guy, he said it so often.
Yeah, this one bugs me too. I hear it a lot in podcast interviews. I think it might serve a softening function. For example, we're going to do X, but X sounds very harsh, so we say we're sort of Xing.
Post by: Davnasty on June 22, 2018, 11:36:37 AM
I had to listen to the CEO and some VPs on a video conference, and what was driving me crazy was that they kept saying they were "sort of" doing things.
"We're sort of changing how we deal with our customers." Well, are you changing it, or not?
I ended up muting one guy, he said it so often.
"If you don't stop talking like that I'm sort of, gonna like, punch you in the face. You know what I mean, right?"
Post by: nnls on June 22, 2018, 04:58:23 PM
These type of sentence enders are similar to raising the pitch at the end, to make it sound like a question. It does make the speaker sound immature or indecisive.
One more thing: I get annoyed when people say that babies are "flirting" when they smile or make eye contact. There has to be another word for this.
Adding "right?" at the end of sentences. I was listening to the radio where a guest was describing some factual events, and every few sentences she added the word right as a question. Not sure whether she was gauging whether her host agreed with her, or was following what she was saying, or what.It could be a regional thing. My sister-in-law spent a year in Australia and came back adding "yeah?" onto the end of half her statements in the same way.
I just dislike that wishy washy way of talking - just say what you want to say.
I have been told by multiple people when I have been travelling that Australians always sound like we are asking a question because of our inflection at the end of our sentences. Ive never noticed us saying "yeah?" but I will listen out for it today at work.
Post by: GreenSheep on June 22, 2018, 06:14:51 PM
I had to listen to the CEO and some VPs on a video conference, and what was driving me crazy was that they kept saying they were "sort of" doing things.
"We're sort of changing how we deal with our customers." Well, are you changing it, or not?
I ended up muting one guy, he said it so often.
This make me think of "very kind of," as in, "The movie was good, but it was very kind of dark." Well, was it very or was it kind of? It can't be both! (I also often hear "very sort of.")
Post by: LaineyAZ on June 23, 2018, 10:18:51 AM
And add my name to those who dislike the phrase "sort of" that we're hearing everywhere. Seems like it's used by those who are unsure of their facts and so use that phrase to weasel out if they find out what they said is not accurate - "well, I said 'sort of' !"
Post by: MissNancyPryor on June 23, 2018, 07:00:32 PM
As in, "Whenever I got back to the house, I realized I forgot my key."
Not sure if this is a regional thing. It is pretty distracting.
Post by: Morning Glory on June 23, 2018, 07:10:13 PM
There seems to be an increasing use of the word "whenever" instead of "when".
As in, "Whenever I got back to the house, I realized I forgot my key."
Not sure if this is a regional thing. It is pretty distracting.
This is regional, also sort of low class. I used to live in Central IL and people said that a lot.
Post by: GreenSheep on June 24, 2018, 09:20:48 AM
There seems to be an increasing use of the word "whenever" instead of "when".
As in, "Whenever I got back to the house, I realized I forgot my key."
Not sure if this is a regional thing. It is pretty distracting.
This is regional, also sort of low class. I used to live in Central IL and people said that a lot.
I hear it in the Southwest, too, so I'm not sure it's regional, but it does seem to be lower class. And I find it distracting as well.
Post by: Nicholas Carter on June 25, 2018, 07:58:16 AM
You know how, when you're listening to someone talking, you make eye contact and nod a little bit and go "yeah, okay" every know and then, just so the person talking gets a signal that you're attending to them? This is, at least in part, that in return. Signalling from the speaker to the listener that the speaker is attending to them: Giving them a chance to take the floor, prompting them for a nod or an "okay", and just sort of running juice through the connection. Think of it as a network ping.Adding "right?" at the end of sentences. I was listening to the radio where a guest was describing some factual events, and every few sentences she added the word right as a question. Not sure whether she was gauging whether her host agreed with her, or was following what she was saying, or what.It could be a regional thing. My sister-in-law spent a year in Australia and came back adding "yeah?" onto the end of half her statements in the same way.
I just dislike that wishy washy way of talking - just say what you want to say.
Either of those are much more forgivable than "you know what I mean?". If you're really asking the question as in "this is a complex explanation, do you understand it" that's fine, but as a way to end a sentence it's just painful. Are you actually asking me to respond yes or no every time?
Funny thing is the few people I've know to talk like this I disagreed with on a lot of lifestyle choices so no, I often did not know what they meant.
Post by: Travis on June 26, 2018, 07:09:02 PM
You know how, when you're listening to someone talking, you make eye contact and nod a little bit and go "yeah, okay" every know and then, just so the person talking gets a signal that you're attending to them? This is, at least in part, that in return. Signalling from the speaker to the listener that the speaker is attending to them: Giving them a chance to take the floor, prompting them for a nod or an "okay", and just sort of running juice through the connection. Think of it as a network ping.Adding "right?" at the end of sentences. I was listening to the radio where a guest was describing some factual events, and every few sentences she added the word right as a question. Not sure whether she was gauging whether her host agreed with her, or was following what she was saying, or what.It could be a regional thing. My sister-in-law spent a year in Australia and came back adding "yeah?" onto the end of half her statements in the same way.
I just dislike that wishy washy way of talking - just say what you want to say.
Either of those are much more forgivable than "you know what I mean?". If you're really asking the question as in "this is a complex explanation, do you understand it" that's fine, but as a way to end a sentence it's just painful. Are you actually asking me to respond yes or no every time?
Funny thing is the few people I've know to talk like this I disagreed with on a lot of lifestyle choices so no, I often did not know what they meant.
I find myself saying "okay" a lot during phone calls while the other person is talking. I'd prefer to just keep my mouth shut and let them get it all out, but every time I do that they'll stop and check that I'm still on the line as if NOT interrupting them with a bunch of "okays" is rude.
Post by: Nicholas Carter on June 27, 2018, 05:47:06 AM
Well, it is.You know how, when you're listening to someone talking, you make eye contact and nod a little bit and go "yeah, okay" every know and then, just so the person talking gets a signal that you're attending to them? This is, at least in part, that in return. Signalling from the speaker to the listener that the speaker is attending to them: Giving them a chance to take the floor, prompting them for a nod or an "okay", and just sort of running juice through the connection. Think of it as a network ping.Adding "right?" at the end of sentences. I was listening to the radio where a guest was describing some factual events, and every few sentences she added the word right as a question. Not sure whether she was gauging whether her host agreed with her, or was following what she was saying, or what.It could be a regional thing. My sister-in-law spent a year in Australia and came back adding "yeah?" onto the end of half her statements in the same way.
I just dislike that wishy washy way of talking - just say what you want to say.
Either of those are much more forgivable than "you know what I mean?". If you're really asking the question as in "this is a complex explanation, do you understand it" that's fine, but as a way to end a sentence it's just painful. Are you actually asking me to respond yes or no every time?
Funny thing is the few people I've know to talk like this I disagreed with on a lot of lifestyle choices so no, I often did not know what they meant.
I find myself saying "okay" a lot during phone calls while the other person is talking. I'd prefer to just keep my mouth shut and let them get it all out, but every time I do that they'll stop and check that I'm still on the line as if NOT interrupting them with a bunch of "okays" is rude.
You're supposed to be giving continuous, low content feedback for the whole conversation. Makes people feel like you're participating, even if you're not really adding any content to the conversation. Not giving that feedback is a low-level non-verbal signal that the other person should stop talking: Because they're boring you, upsetting you, confusing you, etc.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on July 25, 2018, 04:14:38 PM
Post by: Kris on July 25, 2018, 04:18:19 PM
I have been reading various blogs that have pictures that can be enlarged. When did "Click to biggify" replace "Click to enlarge"? Biggify? Really?
Hah. My husband is a software developer and started his career in the early 80s. He and his friends almost always say "embiggen."
I just ignore it. :D
Post by: marble_faun on July 25, 2018, 04:28:40 PM
I have been reading various blogs that have pictures that can be enlarged. When did "Click to biggify" replace "Click to enlarge"? Biggify? Really?
Hah. My husband is a software developer and started his career in the early 80s. He and his friends almost always say "embiggen."
I just ignore it. :D
It's a reference to Dungeons & Dragons. :-)
Post by: Kris on July 25, 2018, 04:29:46 PM
I have been reading various blogs that have pictures that can be enlarged. When did "Click to biggify" replace "Click to enlarge"? Biggify? Really?
Hah. My husband is a software developer and started his career in the early 80s. He and his friends almost always say "embiggen."
I just ignore it. :D
It's a reference to Dungeons & Dragons. :-)
Embiggen is? Funny, my husband has never played D&D. I guess he got it through osmosis!
Post by: RetiredAt63 on July 25, 2018, 04:35:05 PM
Post by: chaskavitch on July 25, 2018, 04:38:49 PM
And they get to inflict this on the rest of us why? Keep shoptalk in the shop. Do I go around referring to your children as your F1s?
Ha! I never thought of that, and I quite enjoy it. I'm not going to actually use it, but it will make me laugh silently in my head sometimes :) Thanks.
PS: I also say embiggen occasionally, and I didn't know it was a D&D reference, but I'm pretty sure I got it from my husband, in which case a D&D origin makes sense.
Post by: Tyson on July 25, 2018, 05:25:30 PM
Adding "right?" at the end of sentences. I was listening to the radio where a guest was describing some factual events, and every few sentences she added the word right as a question. Not sure whether she was gauging whether her host agreed with her, or was following what she was saying, or what.
I just dislike that wishy washy way of talking - just say what you want to say.
I know, right?
Post by: marble_faun on July 25, 2018, 06:37:21 PM
I have been reading various blogs that have pictures that can be enlarged. When did "Click to biggify" replace "Click to enlarge"? Biggify? Really?
Hah. My husband is a software developer and started his career in the early 80s. He and his friends almost always say "embiggen."
I just ignore it. :D
It's a reference to Dungeons & Dragons. :-)
Embiggen is? Funny, my husband has never played D&D. I guess he got it through osmosis!
Correction!
I asked my husband for some etymological clarity:
He says "embiggen" is a term that he and his friends group started using in D&D because the books often used over-complicated words for spells and they thought it was funny. He says: "'embiggen' sounds better than 'enlarge.' It was a pretentious-sounding Spoonerism."
Because I learned D&D from them, I thought it was an official term. My mistake!
EDIT: Oh! Even more info! Apparently the word "embiggen" gained popularity starting in 1996, when it was featured as an invented word in the Simpsons! (Thank you, OED!)
Post by: Morning Glory on July 25, 2018, 09:54:37 PM
I have been reading various blogs that have pictures that can be enlarged. When did "Click to biggify" replace "Click to enlarge"? Biggify? Really?
Hah. My husband is a software developer and started his career in the early 80s. He and his friends almost always say "embiggen."
I just ignore it. :D
It's a reference to Dungeons & Dragons. :-)
Embiggen is? Funny, my husband has never played D&D. I guess he got it through osmosis!
Correction!
I asked my husband for some etymological clarity:
He says "embiggen" is a term that he and his friends group started using in D&D because the books often used over-complicated words for spells and they thought it was funny. He says: "'embiggen' sounds better than 'enlarge.' It was a pretentious-sounding Spoonerism."
Because I learned D&D from them, I thought it was an official term. My mistake!
EDIT: Oh! Even more info! Apparently the word "embiggen" gained popularity starting in 1996, when it was featured as an invented word in the Simpsons! (Thank you, OED!)
I immediately thought of the Simpsons, it is the only place I have ever heard embiggen. In the opening sequence, the statue of Jebediah Sprint has a quote on the bottom "A noble spirit embiggens the smallest mind".
Post by: Raymond Reddington on July 25, 2018, 10:11:55 PM
-webinar
-uber (specifically when used to refer to a cab, not the company...the brand name should not be synonymous with a cab, especially since lyft is better)
-emoji (seriously...what the hell happened to emoticon?)
-"circle back"
-use of the pronoun "we" to actually mean "you (sing.)"
-any bastardizations of social media names "twitterati" etc.
-selfie
-"turnt up"
-"to 11"
-"GOAT" (instead of just saying greatest of all time)
-"keeping up with the joneses/jones'"
Post by: Davnasty on July 26, 2018, 06:27:47 AM
-bae
-webinar
-uber (specifically when used to refer to a cab, not the company...the brand name should not be synonymous with a cab, especially since lyft is better)
-emoji (seriously...what the hell happened to emoticon?)
-"circle back"
-use of the pronoun "we" to actually mean "you (sing.)"
-any bastardizations of social media names "twitterati" etc.
-selfie
-"turnt up"
-"to 11"
-"GOAT" (instead of just saying greatest of all time)
-"keeping up with the joneses/jones'"
Doesn't emoticon refer to pictures made up of text and symbols whereas emoji is the newer version which is just a picture? If you're going beyond just the word and saying emoticons are better, then I agree.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on July 26, 2018, 09:22:00 AM
I hate TLAs And FLAs. Now that they have proliferated, I spend way too much time on the urban slang dictionary. WTH?
Post by: 3Mer on July 28, 2018, 09:50:08 AM
Post by: never give up on July 28, 2018, 10:36:51 AM
Well you can yes, you just have by the way. Presumably they are phrasing it like this as to suggest they’re not going to be taking much of my time. However surely it’s the length of the answer that will determine how much of my time is taken? If they don’t know the answer to the question, which surely the don’t because they are asking it, how on earth do they know if the answer will be long or short?
“What’s the meaning of life?” That’s a good example of a quick question, it is only five words, however the answer may take a very long time indeed.
Post by: Raymond Reddington on July 28, 2018, 10:41:12 AM
And everyone is talking about the origin of enbiggen, but where the hell did biggify come from?
I hate TLAs And FLAs. Now that they have proliferated, I spend way too much time on the urban slang dictionary. WTH?
IKR?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on July 28, 2018, 12:02:07 PM
And everyone is talking about the origin of enbiggen, but where the hell did biggify come from?
I hate TLAs And FLAs. Now that they have proliferated, I spend way too much time on the urban slang dictionary. WTH?
IKR?
That sent me back to the online dictionary. But, yes.
Post by: Exflyboy on July 28, 2018, 12:25:26 PM
"I could care less"
NO. THINK ABOUT IT.
Also, don't put apostrophes for the plural form on acronyms. Tell me about your IRAs, not your IRA's.
Exactly... "Could care less" is an oxymoron..
"Oxymoron"... Thats not even "English"...:)
Post by: Raymond Reddington on July 28, 2018, 01:53:57 PM
there is ONE fucking "o" in "losing"
forgot that one earlier
Post by: RetiredAt63 on July 28, 2018, 02:50:22 PM
"loosing"
there is ONE fucking "o" in "losing"
forgot that one earlier
Well, "loosing" is fine once you remember to add the "en".
Post by: Morning Glory on July 28, 2018, 03:57:03 PM
"loosing"
there is ONE fucking "o" in "losing"
forgot that one earlier
Well, "loosing" is fine once you remember to add the "en".
There seem to be a lot of "dinning" tables on Craigslist as well.
Post by: Dicey on July 28, 2018, 09:47:52 PM
Mostly at places that sell pizza's. Argh!"loosing"
there is ONE fucking "o" in "losing"
forgot that one earlier
Well, "loosing" is fine once you remember to add the "en".
There seem to be a lot of "dinning" tables on Craigslist as well.
Post by: Paul der Krake on July 28, 2018, 10:57:09 PM
Post by: Dicey on July 29, 2018, 12:49:45 AM
Post by: Melisande on July 30, 2018, 07:55:01 PM
1) bucket list — blech
2) “peaked” my interest instead of “piqued” my interest.
Post by: jim555 on July 30, 2018, 08:09:48 PM
Post by: shelivesthedream on July 30, 2018, 08:40:49 PM
Post by: Louisville on July 31, 2018, 08:30:35 AM
Acclimate. A perfectly good word exists already: acclimatise.This may be a "two peoples separated by a common language" issue. In the US, acclimate is the standard, long-standing word for, well... acclimate. Acclimatise sounds stilted to my ear, though I've heard both used.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on July 31, 2018, 08:40:58 AM
Acclimate. A perfectly good word exists already: acclimatise.
Never previously heard the word acclimatise in my life that I'm aware of.
I'll add one along these lines, though. Don't say "conversate" when what you mean is "converse".
Post by: Morning Glory on July 31, 2018, 08:56:42 AM
Acclimate. A perfectly good word exists already: acclimatise.
Never previously heard the word acclimatise in my life that I'm aware of.
I'll add one along these lines, though. Don't say "conversate" when what you mean is "converse".
Or "dialogue", another example of a good noun turned bad verb. I'm also getting tired of "drill down"
I think acclimate/acclimatize is just a British/American difference, like aluminum/aluminium. Now my nephew is driving me crazy by adding an extra syllable to the word "tastes".
Post by: Tyson on July 31, 2018, 01:49:46 PM
Acclimate. A perfectly good word exists already: acclimatise.This may be a "two peoples separated by a common language" issue. In the US, acclimate is the standard, long-standing word for, well... acclimate. Acclimatise sounds stilted to my ear, though I've heard both used.
(https://media.sweatshirtxy.com/styles/large/s3/hoodie-images/psych-movie-zip-hoodie-for-men-ive-heard-it-both-ways-sweatshirt194358.jpg?itok=FWGSEjPc)
Post by: sui generis on July 31, 2018, 05:56:38 PM
Acclimate. A perfectly good word exists already: acclimatise.
Never previously heard the word acclimatise in my life that I'm aware of.
I'll add one along these lines, though. Don't say "conversate" when what you mean is "converse".
Or "dialogue", another example of a good noun turned bad verb. I'm also getting tired of "drill down"
I think acclimate/acclimatize is just a British/American difference, like aluminum/aluminium. Now my nephew is driving me crazy by adding an extra syllable to the word "tastes".
I'm American and I only ever say acclimatize (but you will notice I spell it with a "z"!). When I'm using that word for something other than hiking (or whatever) to high elevations, like maybe in reference to just getting used to a new home, or a new set of circumstances, I feel a little like I should use acclimate instead...in my gut. And it's always bothered me, and I've never stopped to look into it. But, I think acclimatize/acclimatise is used much more with respect to altitude, regardless of your nationality.
Post by: Nicholas Carter on August 07, 2018, 06:20:17 AM
"Loosing" is also fine if you are referring to the act of releasing a bow string to launch an arrow. We often use the word 'fire' in modern speaking, but there's no fire in a bow."loosing"
there is ONE fucking "o" in "losing"
forgot that one earlier
Well, "loosing" is fine once you remember to add the "en".
Post by: calimom on August 18, 2018, 07:44:45 PM
The two biggies for me:
1) bucket list — blech
2) “peaked” my interest instead of “piqued” my interest.
Will you be my new best friend?
Regarding "bucket lists": If you want to zip line over the Grand Canyon, learn Swahili or attend the ball drop in New York on New Years, just do those things joyfully. Just don't make them seem like grim boxes you must check off before you die.
And "peaked" or "peeked" my interest. Perhaps while "pouring" over documents before you loose interest.
Post by: Dicey on August 18, 2018, 11:04:44 PM
And @calimom, will you be mine ♡♡♡?The two biggies for me:
1) bucket list — blech
2) “peaked” my interest instead of “piqued” my interest.
Will you be my new best friend?
Regarding "bucket lists": If you want to zip line over the Grand Canyon, learn Swahili or attend the ball drop in New York on New Years, just do those things joyfully. Just don't make them seem like grim boxes you must check off before you die.
And "peaked" or "peeked" my interest. Perhaps while "pouring" over documents before you loose interest.
Post by: calimom on August 19, 2018, 12:13:18 PM
Post by: Psewer on August 24, 2018, 04:16:57 AM
Post by: GuitarStv on August 24, 2018, 09:51:49 AM
"loosing"
there is ONE fucking "o" in "losing"
forgot that one earlier
Well, "loosing" is fine once you remember to add the "en".
What about America loosing Trump on the world? :P
Post by: Cwadda on August 24, 2018, 10:14:44 AM
No, you did not literally drive through a fucking stop sign.
No, that guitar solo did not literally knock your socks off. FIGURATIVELY. IT FIGURATIVELY MADE YOUR HEAD SPIN, FUCKING DAMMIT!
Post by: tarheeldan on August 24, 2018, 10:27:35 AM
Them: "Hey tarheeldan! Are we on for tonight?"
Me: "Absolutely!"
Them: "Be there for six"
(they mean they plan to arrive at 6pm) I sometimes ask: "For six what?"
Post by: marble_faun on August 24, 2018, 12:45:47 PM
To me, "I'll catch you up" means something like, "I'll fill you in."
Post by: GreenSheep on August 24, 2018, 04:05:28 PM
This one drives me nuts:
Them: "Hey tarheeldan! Are we on for tonight?"
Me: "Absolutely!"
Them: "Be there for six"
(they mean they plan to arrive at 6pm) I sometimes ask: "For six what?"
I actually kind of like/appreciate this one. I learned it when I lived in New Orleans for a few years, and (there, at least) it means that the person will be there in time to meet you at 6pm, rather than strolling in the door at 6pm on the nose or showing up late. To me it seems courteous that they plan to be there a couple of minutes early so they're ready for [meeting you at] 6pm.
Post by: lollylegs on August 24, 2018, 04:38:26 PM
Onboarding - what was wrong with induction or orientation?
Offboarding - I guess it sounds better than saying we fired thousands of people
vagina - it seems that millions of women don't know their own anatomy and refer to their vulva as their vagina - drives me nuts! - vulva =outside - vagina = inside
millennials - so many stereotypes with this
Post by: rdaneel0 on August 24, 2018, 04:50:11 PM
Post by: marble_faun on August 24, 2018, 05:35:37 PM
Offboarding - I guess it sounds better than saying we fired thousands of people
Similarly: "to sunset." As in, you're using a web service that you like, but then its makers decide to "sunset" it, and now it's gone forever. I guess "sunset" sounds nicer than "kill."
Post by: tralfamadorian on August 24, 2018, 05:45:29 PM
Post by: Paul der Krake on August 24, 2018, 11:43:09 PM
Post by: accolay on August 26, 2018, 10:59:08 PM
Deplane in place of disembark.
Post by: tarheeldan on August 27, 2018, 09:29:38 AM
This one drives me nuts:
Them: "Hey tarheeldan! Are we on for tonight?"
Me: "Absolutely!"
Them: "Be there for six"
(they mean they plan to arrive at 6pm) I sometimes ask: "For six what?"
I actually kind of like/appreciate this one. I learned it when I lived in New Orleans for a few years, and (there, at least) it means that the person will be there in time to meet you at 6pm, rather than strolling in the door at 6pm on the nose or showing up late. To me it seems courteous that they plan to be there a couple of minutes early so they're ready for [meeting you at] 6pm.
This is in New England, and they do not mean "I will be there early, in order to be ready for our meeting at 6". They are using "for" in place of "at."
Post by: MissNancyPryor on August 27, 2018, 06:21:20 PM
Using "ask" as a noun, instead of "request". As in, "That is a big ask." Or, "We should meet to clarify what the ask is."
Also, using "heavy lift" instead of "challenge". As in, "That is a heavy lift for your team, let me know if they need help."
It is like a disease. Someone starts it and then pretty soon everyone is mimicking the lingo.
Post by: sui generis on August 27, 2018, 06:52:07 PM
Given my tangential connection to silicon valley techies, I'm guessing it's a rampant joke amongst them.
Post by: Cwadda on August 27, 2018, 08:02:26 PM
More fad-speak has been happening at work recently. Lately there has been a proliferation of the following:
Using "ask" as a noun, instead of "request". As in, "That is a big ask." Or, "We should meet to clarify what the ask is."
Also, using "heavy lift" instead of "challenge". As in, "That is a heavy lift for your team, let me know if they need help."
It is like a disease. Someone starts it and then pretty soon everyone is mimicking the lingo.
Literally a disease!
*facepalm*
Post by: tralfamadorian on August 27, 2018, 08:09:30 PM
Seems some others share similar views:
https://www.economist.com/johnson/2010/06/25/journalese-blacklist-deplane
Post by: marble_faun on August 27, 2018, 09:51:27 PM
This one isn't bugging me yet, but I hope it doesn't catch on. It's "copy pasta". I see it a lot on Slack where groups are informally communicating about projects. I think it's meant to be funny, like someone mistyped it and now it's a joke (like spelling "the" "teh").
Given my tangential connection to silicon valley techies, I'm guessing it's a rampant joke amongst them.
Copypasta is longstanding part of internet culture! It's hard to explain, but imagine memes that are just typed text. The text is is copied and inserted into different online conversations. Often it's a really passionate, strident block of text, or a strange sentence that resonates with people in some way.
Post by: tarheeldan on August 28, 2018, 08:14:00 AM
Also, using "heavy lift" instead of "challenge". As in, "That is a heavy lift for your team, let me know if they need help."
Gaaa! That one's pretty bad. I've kinda gotten used to "ask"
Post by: sui generis on August 28, 2018, 07:22:12 PM
"Folks" to me was my parents' parents (they would always say, "my folks...."). Now I have to call everybody folks (whether using the second or the third person) or else I'm given the side eye like I'm a barbarian or something!
Post by: JanetJackson on August 28, 2018, 07:28:49 PM
I swear I’m going to... I don’t know... really lose it if this doesn’t fade in the next few years.
“DISRUPT/DISRUPTION” when referring to companies, etc. “so and so is DISRUPTING the RV industry”..... staaaahhhhp.
Here’s another thing... it’s very particular. Sometimes people over annunciate all of the letters in ‘Important’, especially the center ‘T’. It seems to mostly be upper class white women over 35... but that’s just a total random observation. There are at least two people on regular podcasts that I listen to who do it and it ruins the whole episode when I hear them over annunciating that ‘T’...
Post by: Cwadda on August 28, 2018, 09:32:04 PM
Here's a good one:
"I've been soaking up the sun for the past few hours, literally."
Edit: here's another one
"I’ll be happy when I’m done with these antibiotics! Sheesh it’s taking everything out of me #literally"
Post by: Freckles on August 29, 2018, 12:19:45 AM
And I agree about "folks." I get why it is being used and I don't have a problem with that, I just really don't like the word itself. It doesn't mean to me what it means to most, I guess? It has some other feeling to it that is just not a feeling I like? I don't know, but you're not alone, sui generis.
Post by: Dicey on August 29, 2018, 12:28:03 AM
“CIRCLE BACK”....Uh, hate to say this JanetJ, but I believe the word you want is "enunciate". I think I understand what you mean though. By far the worst abuser of this word is Nancy Grace. Ugh.
I swear I’m going to... I don’t know... really lose it if this doesn’t fade in the next few years.
“DISRUPT/DISRUPTION” when referring to companies, etc. “so and so is DISRUPTING the RV industry”..... staaaahhhhp.
Here’s another thing... it’s very particular. Sometimes people over annunciate all of the letters in ‘Important’, especially the center ‘T’. It seems to mostly be upper class white women over 35... but that’s just a total random observation. There are at least two people on regular podcasts that I listen to who do it and it ruins the whole episode when I hear them over annunciating that ‘T’...
Post by: Morning Glory on August 29, 2018, 05:22:53 AM
I agree about the misuse of literally. It is annoying. I correct my own children about it a lot because I try to do damage control where I can!
And I agree about "folks." I get why it is being used and I don't have a problem with that, I just really don't like the word itself. It doesn't mean to me what it means to most, I guess? It has some other feeling to it that is just not a feeling I like? I don't know, but you're not alone, sui generis.
In some accents “folks” is easy to mishear as “fucks” so I tend to avoid it.
Maybe the antibiotics were a cathartic experience, literally...
Post by: Davnasty on August 29, 2018, 06:24:12 AM
I am going to start posting daily occurrences of the improper use of "literally" because it makes me so angry. I want other people to get angry with me, it'll feel better. Well, maybe not daily but frequently enough to get some rage going.
Here's a good one:
"I've been soaking up the sun for the past few hours, literally."
Edit: here's another one
"I’ll be happy when I’m done with these antibiotics! Sheesh it’s taking everything out of me #literally"
I've been bothered by this for a long time. One of the worst I've heard was "literally by the skin of my teeth". How could it get more figurative than this, teeth don't have skin. And news casters using it. Come on people, your whole job is talking. I've generally considered this a dealbreaker for relationships too, unless the misuser is willing to hear me out and change their misguided ways.
Also, have you seen the show Archer? You'd like Archer.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 29, 2018, 06:56:01 AM
"Folks" was more an American than Canadian general usage word (at least in English Quebec while I was growing up). I first noticed "folks" replacing "people" with politicians' speeches - I think some wanted to be seen as "just folks" so they used folks instead of people. Made me think they were faking it. But now it is ubiquitous.
And yes I know language changes. I remember when "gay" meant happy and light-hearted.
Post by: Dicey on August 29, 2018, 07:54:18 AM
Um, I'm a (Canadian) middle-class white woman over 35, and yes there are 2 t's in important."You people" sounds vaguely accusatory, whereas "you folks" sounds friendler. There's also kind of a degree of distance. Close, closer, closest: people, folks, friends.
"Folks" was more an American than Canadian general usage word (at least in English Quebec while I was growing up). I first noticed "folks" replacing "people" with politicians' speeches - I think some wanted to be seen as "just folks" so they used folks instead of people. Made me think they were faking it. But now it is ubiquitous.
And yes I know language changes. I remember when "gay" meant happy and light-hearted.
Just my two cents, folks.
Post by: By the River on August 29, 2018, 08:11:31 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html (https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html)
Is sir also a problem?
Post by: Cwadda on August 29, 2018, 09:14:10 AM
"Sometimes when I catch myself dwelling in the past I literally kick my balls back to reality."
"I love him so much I’m #literally sick without him"
"Voted for the first time ever in person!!! #turnfloridablue #nomoreredtide #LITERALLY"
Please, someone stop this epidemic, FIGURATIVELY speaking. It makes me want to FIGURATIVELY jump off a bridge.
Post by: Davnasty on August 29, 2018, 09:42:43 AM
"I love him so much I’m #literally sick without him"
I'd give this one a "plausible". It's probably not true but you could be literally sick due to emotions.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on August 29, 2018, 12:30:41 PM
Is ma'am a word that people wish would go away? I have always thought it was a polite manner to address someone.After graduating from college, we moved to the Houston area, and "sir" and "ma'am" are still in common use. A lot of kids are taught by their parents to use those words, and I think it's awesome. Even after moving northward, I try to use it more often, because I think it shows respect for the person with whom you're speaking.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html (https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html)
Is sir also a problem?
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on August 29, 2018, 01:03:13 PM
Is ma'am a word that people wish would go away? I have always thought it was a polite manner to address someone.After graduating from college, we moved to the Houston area, and "sir" and "ma'am" are still in common use. A lot of kids are taught by their parents to use those words, and I think it's awesome. Even after moving northward, I try to use it more often, because I think it shows respect for the person with whom you're speaking.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html (https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html)
Is sir also a problem?
Wow, that's crazy. Many children in the South are taught to use the word unfailingly as a sign of respect to their elders. I'd be pissed if my children were punished for saying "sir" or "ma'am". When that's how you learn to speak, it's not exactly easy to stop saying "yes ma'am", because it comes out involuntarily. I had to practice for several years once I was in college to stop calling store clerks and waiters/waitresses "sir" and "ma'am", many of whom were younger than me. But the fact that this story is ridiculous is the only reason it's a story at all.
Post by: tralfamadorian on August 29, 2018, 01:17:51 PM
"You people" sounds vaguely accusatory, whereas "you folks" sounds friendler. There's also kind of a degree of distance. Close, closer, closest: people, folks, friends.
Just my two cents, folks.
+1
Folks is also an easy substitute for y'all for southerns trying to soften their accent.
Post by: ketchup on August 29, 2018, 01:30:53 PM
"Sir" makes me feel more important than I am (or that I'm being schmoozed by a salespunk), "ma'am" makes GF feel older than she is. We're in our mid-20s in the midwest. I grew up here, and she grew up in the southwest. Just some data points.Is ma'am a word that people wish would go away? I have always thought it was a polite manner to address someone.After graduating from college, we moved to the Houston area, and "sir" and "ma'am" are still in common use. A lot of kids are taught by their parents to use those words, and I think it's awesome. Even after moving northward, I try to use it more often, because I think it shows respect for the person with whom you're speaking.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html (https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html)
Is sir also a problem?
Wow, that's crazy. Many children in the South are taught to use the word unfailingly as a sign of respect to their elders. I'd be pissed if my children were punished for saying "sir" or "ma'am". When that's how you learn to speak, it's not exactly easy to stop saying "yes ma'am", because it comes out involuntarily. I had to practice for several years once I was in college to stop calling store clerks and waiters/waitresses "sir" and "ma'am", many of whom were younger than me. But the fact that this story is ridiculous is the only reason it's a story at all.
Post by: solon on August 29, 2018, 01:34:37 PM
Post by: sui generis on August 29, 2018, 01:46:07 PM
And I agree about "folks." I get why it is being used and I don't have a problem with that, I just really don't like the word itself. It doesn't mean to me what it means to most, I guess? It has some other feeling to it that is just not a feeling I like? I don't know, but you're not alone, sui generis.ah, so glad I'm not alone! And yes, I have the same feeling you describe. It's not something that I can exactly articulate, but it's a feeling inside that just feels wrong in some particular way.
After reading a few other responses, it might just have to do with that attempt at aw-shucks-familiarity. For me at least. I really dislike it when people sorry, ahem folks work hard to seem overly familiar and...humble...or casual? It just feels fake when everybody *only* uses folks. Especially in the third person!
Post by: Cwadda on August 29, 2018, 02:37:37 PM
"You people" sounds vaguely accusatory, whereas "you folks" sounds friendler. There's also kind of a degree of distance. Close, closer, closest: people, folks, friends.
Just my two cents, folks.
+1
Folks is also an easy substitute for y'all for southerns trying to soften their accent.
Agreed. I think "folks" is a great word. Eliminates the gender-specification in "you guys" as well.
Post by: Davnasty on August 29, 2018, 02:44:42 PM
"You people" sounds vaguely accusatory, whereas "you folks" sounds friendler. There's also kind of a degree of distance. Close, closer, closest: people, folks, friends.
Just my two cents, folks.
+1
Folks is also an easy substitute for y'all for southerns trying to soften their accent.
Agreed. I think "folks" is a great word. Eliminates the gender-specification in "you guys" as well.
The Goonies would have been a whole different movie if Sloth said "Hey Folks"
Post by: JanetJackson on August 29, 2018, 03:42:26 PM
Is ma'am a word that people wish would go away? I have always thought it was a polite manner to address someone.I saw this article earlier this week and while I think the punishment for a kid that young was far too drastic (I forget, and I'm not reopening the article, but I think the kid was young grade school age?), I do think the issue, or in the very least, issues LIKE this seem/ed to stem from being repeatedly called something you don't want to be called.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html (https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html)
Is sir also a problem?
Who knows, that teacher could have been a male, or gender non-conforming.
If I told someone (an adult) my name (which is not Luke) and they called me Luke once, I'd correct them so sweetly and politely it could sweeten a cup of coffee, but if they continued to call me Luke after a few corrections, I'd have to assume it was on purpose and to agitate and disrespect me.
Just my two cents.
Post by: MissNancyPryor on August 29, 2018, 05:26:14 PM
Another few misuses of the literally.
"Sometimes when I catch myself dwelling in the past I literally kick my balls back to reality."
"I love him so much I’m #literally sick without him"
"Voted for the first time ever in person!!! #turnfloridablue #nomoreredtide #LITERALLY"
Please, someone stop this epidemic, FIGURATIVELY speaking. It makes me want to FIGURATIVELY jump off a bridge.
It is a verbal crutch. They want some big sounding word in there to emphasize things. We should start offering up "utterly" which is the same number of syllables and means what they think they are saying and even ends with that handy -ly thing. But, the vowel out front is not as smoooove and therefore the idea just won't take. Too hard to get off the launch pad.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 29, 2018, 05:48:32 PM
Um, I'm a (Canadian) middle-class white woman over 35, and yes there are 2 t's in important."You people" sounds vaguely accusatory, whereas "you folks" sounds friendler. There's also kind of a degree of distance. Close, closer, closest: people, folks, friends.
"Folks" was more an American than Canadian general usage word (at least in English Quebec while I was growing up). I first noticed "folks" replacing "people" with politicians' speeches - I think some wanted to be seen as "just folks" so they used folks instead of people. Made me think they were faking it. But now it is ubiquitous.
And yes I know language changes. I remember when "gay" meant happy and light-hearted.
Just my two cents, folks.
You people and you folks both sound terrible. If I am talking to people, "you" works fine. If I want their attention, "hey, everyone" works well.
I think part of this may be a geography outlook - Canadian versus American English.
Post by: JanetJackson on August 30, 2018, 09:20:01 AM
“CIRCLE BACK”....Uh, hate to say this JanetJ, but I believe the word you want is "enunciate". I think I understand what you mean though. By far the worst abuser of this word is Nancy Grace. Ugh.
I swear I’m going to... I don’t know... really lose it if this doesn’t fade in the next few years.
“DISRUPT/DISRUPTION” when referring to companies, etc. “so and so is DISRUPTING the RV industry”..... staaaahhhhp.
Here’s another thing... it’s very particular. Sometimes people over annunciate all of the letters in ‘Important’, especially the center ‘T’. It seems to mostly be upper class white women over 35... but that’s just a total random observation. There are at least two people on regular podcasts that I listen to who do it and it ruins the whole episode when I hear them over annunciating that ‘T’...
You're right, my mistake! *although, side note: I don't know who Nancy Grace is... NOTICE HOW I DID NOT SAY "MY BAD' BECAUSE I NEARLY VOMIT ANYTIME SOMEONE SAYS THAT.
Ha, had to add an additional phrase I'm annoyed by.
Post by: Jouer on August 31, 2018, 07:46:37 AM
Is ma'am a word that people wish would go away? I have always thought it was a polite manner to address someone.I saw this article earlier this week and while I think the punishment for a kid that young was far too drastic (I forget, and I'm not reopening the article, but I think the kid was young grade school age?), I do think the issue, or in the very least, issues LIKE this seem/ed to stem from being repeatedly called something you don't want to be called.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html (https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html)
Is sir also a problem?
Who knows, that teacher could have been a male, or gender non-conforming.
If I told someone (an adult) my name (which is not Luke) and they called me Luke once, I'd correct them so sweetly and politely it could sweeten a cup of coffee, but if they continued to call me Luke after a few corrections, I'd have to assume it was on purpose and to agitate and disrespect me.
Just my two cents.
If someone in my friend group got annoyed about mistakenly being called Luke, that would be their new name forever. Their old name would cease to exist. We'd be singing Lukas With The Lid Off. We'd get your dad to call you and tell you "Luke, I am your father" (even though that's not the correct line from the film). It would be glorious.
Post by: teen persuasion on September 03, 2018, 09:48:47 AM
Um, I'm a (Canadian) middle-class white woman over 35, and yes there are 2 t's in important."You people" sounds vaguely accusatory, whereas "you folks" sounds friendler. There's also kind of a degree of distance. Close, closer, closest: people, folks, friends.
"Folks" was more an American than Canadian general usage word (at least in English Quebec while I was growing up). I first noticed "folks" replacing "people" with politicians' speeches - I think some wanted to be seen as "just folks" so they used folks instead of people. Made me think they were faking it. But now it is ubiquitous.
And yes I know language changes. I remember when "gay" meant happy and light-hearted.
Just my two cents, folks.
You people and you folks both sound terrible. If I am talking to people, "you" works fine. If I want their attention, "hey, everyone" works well.
I think part of this may be a geography outlook - Canadian versus American English.
I think it is a geographical issue, but I'd put the border a good bit farther south. Anyone using "folks" in my area (NY) would be immediately tagging themselves as a transplant.
But the "you guys" mentioned in another post is completely gender neutral here. I'm reminded of how the nuns in my all-girls HS would object whenever they heard "youse guys", but it was the extraneous "S" sound they objected to, not the male connotations when there wasn't a male in sight. That was 30+ years ago - I no longer hear "youse", thank goodness.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on September 03, 2018, 11:34:30 AM
Um, I'm a (Canadian) middle-class white woman over 35, and yes there are 2 t's in important."You people" sounds vaguely accusatory, whereas "you folks" sounds friendler. There's also kind of a degree of distance. Close, closer, closest: people, folks, friends.
"Folks" was more an American than Canadian general usage word (at least in English Quebec while I was growing up). I first noticed "folks" replacing "people" with politicians' speeches - I think some wanted to be seen as "just folks" so they used folks instead of people. Made me think they were faking it. But now it is ubiquitous.
And yes I know language changes. I remember when "gay" meant happy and light-hearted.
Just my two cents, folks.
You people and you folks both sound terrible. If I am talking to people, "you" works fine. If I want their attention, "hey, everyone" works well.
I think part of this may be a geography outlook - Canadian versus American English.
I think it is a geographical issue, but I'd put the border a good bit farther south. Anyone using "folks" in my area (NY) would be immediately tagging themselves as a transplant.
But the "you guys" mentioned in another post is completely gender neutral here. I'm reminded of how the nuns in my all-girls HS would object whenever they heard "youse guys", but it was the extraneous "S" sound they objected to, not the male connotations when there wasn't a male in sight. That was 30+ years ago - I no longer hear "youse", thank goodness.
I hear "youse" from one local person here. It was a surprise the first time I heard it.
"Guys" seems to have become partially gender neutral and "gals" has basically disappeared. If I said "the guys are working on that" it would be though that they were male, but I could easily see someone say "hey guys, let's head out" when everyone being addressed is female.
Post by: Dicey on September 03, 2018, 11:44:15 AM
Re: Nancy Grace - consider yourself lucky. She's a talking head for some cable news show. In my traveling days, one of my regular hotels had a crappy cable package (read: no HGTV) and she was on whatever network I watched instead. She's still around, so someone may chime in to help. I'd Google her, but I don't want her in my retinas.“CIRCLE BACK”....Uh, hate to say this JanetJ, but I believe the word you want is "enunciate". I think I understand what you mean though. By far the worst abuser of this word is Nancy Grace. Ugh.
I swear I’m going to... I don’t know... really lose it if this doesn’t fade in the next few years.
“DISRUPT/DISRUPTION” when referring to companies, etc. “so and so is DISRUPTING the RV industry”..... staaaahhhhp.
Here’s another thing... it’s very particular. Sometimes people over annunciate all of the letters in ‘Important’, especially the center ‘T’. It seems to mostly be upper class white women over 35... but that’s just a total random observation. There are at least two people on regular podcasts that I listen to who do it and it ruins the whole episode when I hear them over annunciating that ‘T’...
You're right, my mistake! *although, side note: I don't know who Nancy Grace is... NOTICE HOW I DID NOT SAY "MY BAD' BECAUSE I NEARLY VOMIT ANYTIME SOMEONE SAYS THAT.
Ha, had to add an additional phrase I'm annoyed by.
Post by: nnls on September 03, 2018, 05:47:54 PM
Um, I'm a (Canadian) middle-class white woman over 35, and yes there are 2 t's in important."You people" sounds vaguely accusatory, whereas "you folks" sounds friendler. There's also kind of a degree of distance. Close, closer, closest: people, folks, friends.
"Folks" was more an American than Canadian general usage word (at least in English Quebec while I was growing up). I first noticed "folks" replacing "people" with politicians' speeches - I think some wanted to be seen as "just folks" so they used folks instead of people. Made me think they were faking it. But now it is ubiquitous.
And yes I know language changes. I remember when "gay" meant happy and light-hearted.
Just my two cents, folks.
You people and you folks both sound terrible. If I am talking to people, "you" works fine. If I want their attention, "hey, everyone" works well.
I think part of this may be a geography outlook - Canadian versus American English.
I think it is a geographical issue, but I'd put the border a good bit farther south. Anyone using "folks" in my area (NY) would be immediately tagging themselves as a transplant.
But the "you guys" mentioned in another post is completely gender neutral here. I'm reminded of how the nuns in my all-girls HS would object whenever they heard "youse guys", but it was the extraneous "S" sound they objected to, not the male connotations when there wasn't a male in sight. That was 30+ years ago - I no longer hear "youse", thank goodness.
I hear "youse" from one local person here. It was a surprise the first time I heard it.
"Guys" seems to have become partially gender neutral and "gals" has basically disappeared. If I said "the guys are working on that" it would be though that they were male, but I could easily see someone say "hey guys, let's head out" when everyone being addressed is female.
I hear "youse" a lot in Australia. It annoys me everytime
Post by: Dee on September 03, 2018, 08:17:01 PM
Post by: Anon in Alaska on September 04, 2018, 01:43:46 AM
Post by: JanetJackson on September 04, 2018, 06:13:19 AM
Stop saying "pleaded" when you can say "pled". The defendant has not "pleaded guilty" he has "pled guilty". The previous standard is now archaic and should be scrapped. The longer form is wasteful and adds nothing.I have noticed this A LOT in news articles lately. To the point where I've wondered if something has changed grammatically, for this to be acceptable.
Post by: dandarc on September 11, 2018, 04:34:36 PM
My mom used to refer to me and my partner as "you people," as in, "what would you people like to eat for dinner?" I thought it was so weird, as though we were a big crowd when there were just the two of us. It took me a while to realize the apt word would have been "both" as in "what would you both like to eat for dinner?" I used to get pretty perplexed and worked up over "you people."How do you feel about "y'all"?
Post by: Dee on September 11, 2018, 06:31:19 PM
Post by: sui generis on September 11, 2018, 10:28:23 PM
In law school, that's how they teach you to say it. Well, they didn't ever explicitly point out that "it's pleaded, not pled." But it was definitely everywhere. Pled was not used. I simply conformed, never asked.Stop saying "pleaded" when you can say "pled". The defendant has not "pleaded guilty" he has "pled guilty". The previous standard is now archaic and should be scrapped. The longer form is wasteful and adds nothing.I have noticed this A LOT in news articles lately. To the point where I've wondered if something has changed grammatically, for this to be acceptable.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on September 12, 2018, 06:08:02 AM
My mom used to refer to me and my partner as "you people," as in, "what would you people like to eat for dinner?" I thought it was so weird, as though we were a big crowd when there were just the two of us. It took me a while to realize the apt word would have been "both" as in "what would you both like to eat for dinner?" I used to get pretty perplexed and worked up over "you people."How do you feel about "y'all"?
I say "y'all" all the time. It's a succinct, gender-neutral solution to the ubiquitous English problem of the absence of a plural second-person personal pronoun. I don't care if it positions me geographically when I say it. I have no problem with the fact that I'm from the South.
Go an hour north of where I live though, and "y'all" becomes "y'uns". That one drives me apeshit.
Post by: Morning Glory on September 12, 2018, 08:23:43 PM
In law school, that's how they teach you to say it. Well, they didn't ever explicitly point out that "it's pleaded, not pled." But it was definitely everywhere. Pled was not used. I simply conformed, never asked.Stop saying "pleaded" when you can say "pled". The defendant has not "pleaded guilty" he has "pled guilty". The previous standard is now archaic and should be scrapped. The longer form is wasteful and adds nothing.I have noticed this A LOT in news articles lately. To the point where I've wondered if something has changed grammatically, for this to be acceptable.
Haha, in nursing school, it's "dilatated" and "dilatation" not "dilated" and "dilation" . IRL midwives don't say these the "proper" way, because it sounds weird.
Post by: marble_faun on September 13, 2018, 11:12:29 AM
My mom used to refer to me and my partner as "you people," as in, "what would you people like to eat for dinner?" I thought it was so weird, as though we were a big crowd when there were just the two of us. It took me a while to realize the apt word would have been "both" as in "what would you both like to eat for dinner?" I used to get pretty perplexed and worked up over "you people."How do you feel about "y'all"?
I say "y'all" all the time. It's a succinct, gender-neutral solution to the ubiquitous English problem of the absence of a plural second-person personal pronoun. I don't care if it positions me geographically when I say it. I have no problem with the fact that I'm from the South.
Go an hour north of where I live though, and "y'all" becomes "y'uns". That one drives me apeshit.
Love y'all! Also from the South. My accent has smoothed out during my years away from home, but y'all will always remain. That and pronouncing short E like short I, as in Kinny Rogers, not Kehhhnny.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on September 13, 2018, 11:21:12 AM
My mom used to refer to me and my partner as "you people," as in, "what would you people like to eat for dinner?" I thought it was so weird, as though we were a big crowd when there were just the two of us. It took me a while to realize the apt word would have been "both" as in "what would you both like to eat for dinner?" I used to get pretty perplexed and worked up over "you people."How do you feel about "y'all"?
I say "y'all" all the time. It's a succinct, gender-neutral solution to the ubiquitous English problem of the absence of a plural second-person personal pronoun. I don't care if it positions me geographically when I say it. I have no problem with the fact that I'm from the South.
Go an hour north of where I live though, and "y'all" becomes "y'uns". That one drives me apeshit.
Love y'all! Also from the South. My accent has smoothed out during my years away from home, but y'all will always remain. That and pronouncing short E like short I, as in Kinny Rogers, not Kehhhnny.
Ha! My wife does that. Always tough to tell when she's saying "pen" vs. "pin". I never did pick that one up for some reason, even though it was a common pronunciation where I grew up.
Post by: tralfamadorian on September 13, 2018, 06:24:14 PM
Love y'all! Also from the South. My accent has smoothed out during my years away from home, but y'all will always remain. That and pronouncing short E like short I, as in Kinny Rogers, not Kehhhnny.
Some parts of accents really stick! I'm moderately non-rhotic unless in a really formal situation like a job interview.
Post by: calimom on September 13, 2018, 07:15:13 PM
"Anyways" may or may not be a word. But why add the s?
Post by: tralfamadorian on September 13, 2018, 07:20:23 PM
"Alot"is not a word. "A lot" is two words. Do people not have autocorrect?
"Anyways" may or may not be a word. But why add the s?
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_D_Z-D2tzi14/S8TTPQCPA6I/AAAAAAAACwA/ZHZH-Bi8OmI/s400/ALOT2.png)
Post by: Jouer on September 17, 2018, 01:54:08 PM
"Alot"is not a word. "A lot" is two words. Do people not have autocorrect?
"Anyways" may or may not be a word. But why add the s?
I prefer including the S. Certainly in casual emails, posts, texts. It just feels better.
Post by: accolay on September 17, 2018, 09:50:58 PM
Super is out of control! It must be stopped!
Post by: jinga nation on September 26, 2018, 10:52:57 AM
Post by: accolay on September 26, 2018, 03:40:35 PM
Damn you Harding.
Post by: ketchup on September 26, 2018, 07:16:32 PM
How about "normalcy" instead of normality?"Normality" only ever makes me think of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
Damn you Harding.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on September 27, 2018, 09:50:20 AM
How about "normalcy" instead of normality?
Damn you Harding.
I never even noticed that one. Normalcy definitely sounds better to my ear, but normality doesn't sound too off, either.
I've been hearing the word "trickeration" in place of "trickery" on football broadcasts for the last decade or so. Drives me crazy every time I hear it, but it's basically the new normal at this point.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on September 29, 2018, 06:55:18 AM
I axed my kid not to do that. Wow, that must have hurt!
Post by: sui generis on September 30, 2018, 08:32:42 AM
Post by: Cwadda on September 30, 2018, 06:11:43 PM
Post by: Dave1442397 on September 30, 2018, 06:17:46 PM
"Axed" is actually a legitimate pronunciation, apparently.
It certainly is if you live in The Bronx/Yonkers.
Post by: Dee on September 30, 2018, 07:47:31 PM
Post by: Cwadda on September 30, 2018, 07:55:03 PM
I have a friend who has literally taken to using literally several times per sentence. It is literally driving me bonkers.
Wouldn't it figuratively be driving you bonkers though?
Post by: calimom on October 01, 2018, 12:09:00 AM
Just keep it to yourself, hon.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on October 01, 2018, 04:08:44 AM
A colleague routinely posts in her blog about the most mundane things that really don't bear reporting. She is quite effusive. An example: "I met with Client in their AMAZING conference room and we had the most AWESOME discussion about their needs. We've come up with an AMAZING solution. Am so grateful and blessed by my AWESOME clients!!"
Just keep it to yourself, hon.
Tell her you didn't ax her for that information.
Post by: ketchup on October 01, 2018, 09:13:09 AM
"Axed" is actually a legitimate pronunciation, apparently. Years ago I listened to an episode of A Way With Words and they did a long piece on the history of it. Apparently it was the dominate pronunciation at times and in certain places hundreds of years ago.They could also be a Futurama fan. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOz8vYzFiYE (fun fact: in support of that one-line joke in one episode, they continue saying it that way for the entire run of the show)
Post by: BTDretire on October 01, 2018, 09:58:18 AM
"Alot"is not a word. "A lot" is two words. Do people not have autocorrect?
"Anyways" may or may not be a word. But why add the s?
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_D_Z-D2tzi14/S8TTPQCPA6I/AAAAAAAACwA/ZHZH-Bi8OmI/s400/ALOT2.png)
Reminds me of a little over 20 years ago, I was making a sales pitch in a Cal Tech Lab.
Taped to a counter over an expensive scale, was a note,
A lot
Yep someone crossed out Alot and put A lot.
Post by: GuitarStv on October 01, 2018, 10:15:16 AM
homogenous
Some people insist in using the pronounciation "homo-genius" rather than ho-mo-gen-us". This has always bothered me.
Post by: yakamashii on October 01, 2018, 10:23:05 AM
There's a pronounciation one that has always bothered me:
homogenous
Some people insist in using the pronounciation "homo-genius" rather than ho-mo-gen-us". This has always bothered me.
Like aks/ask, "homo-genius" is legit:
http://grammarist.com/usage/homogenous-homogeneous/ (http://grammarist.com/usage/homogenous-homogeneous/)
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 01, 2018, 12:11:10 PM
There's a pronounciation one that has always bothered me:
homogenous
Some people insist in using the pronounciation "homo-genius" rather than ho-mo-gen-us". This has always bothered me.
When I typed "homogenous" into a search engine it gave me homogeneous, and comments that homogenous are a variant that is not a standard accepted spelling. And then the pronunciation is as you said. So the pronunciation does seem to follow the most common way of spelling the word.
I've learned homogenous in biology, but that term has been supplanted by homologous, which makes more sense - homologous and analogous.
Post by: marble_faun on October 01, 2018, 05:29:10 PM
There's a pronounciation one that has always bothered me:
homogenous
Some people insist in using the pronounciation "homo-genius" rather than ho-mo-gen-us". This has always bothered me.
But homogenEous is a word! According to the OED, homogenEous is the correct, older way and "homogenous" is the "erroneous" version. (Though of course language evolves and so forth -- it does seem homogenEous has precedent.)
Homogenous is also a real word, but it historically it has been used in biology to describe organisms with a common ancestor.
By the way, I had no idea about this before, and I think I always used the two interchangeably! :-) Just got curious and looked it up.
Post by: pbkmaine on October 01, 2018, 06:41:11 PM
Is ma'am a word that people wish would go away? I have always thought it was a polite manner to address someone.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html (https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/parents-outraged-son-punished-referring-163338274.html)
Is sir also a problem?
Not here in the South.
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on October 02, 2018, 11:27:39 AM
There's a pronounciation one that has always bothered me:
homogenous
Some people insist in using the pronunciation "homo-genius" rather than ho-mo-gen-us". This has always bothered me.
But homogenEous is a word! According to the OED, homogenEous is the correct, older way and "homogenous" is the "erroneous" version. (Though of course language evolves and so forth -- it does seem homogenEous has precedent.)
Homogenous is also a real word, but it historically it has been used in biology to describe organisms with a common ancestor.
By the way, I had no idea about this before, and I think I always used the two interchangeably! :-) Just got curious and looked it up.
Fascinating. I had no idea that homogenous and homogeneous were alternate spellings of the same word, much less that homogenous used to be a word with a different meaning altogether.
Here's one I assume we can all agree on: People should stop saying "nukular" when what they mean is "nuclear".
Post by: Freckles on October 03, 2018, 02:44:46 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 03, 2018, 06:12:20 PM
If they have to give up "nukular" then they need to give up"realator" as well.
Nukular I've heard. Realator? Spell check certainly does't like it. Realtor? Regulator?
Post by: Morning Glory on October 03, 2018, 06:33:07 PM
If they have to give up "nukular" then they need to give up"realator" as well.
Nukular I've heard. Realator? Spell check certainly does't like it. Realtor? Regulator?
Both of these are common in central IL. The weirdest mispronunciation I have heard was intestines, pronounced with a long I for the second i, so it rhymed with vines. This was an actual doctor who pronounced it that way.
Post by: Freckles on October 04, 2018, 08:15:52 PM
If they have to give up "nukular" then they need to give up"realator" as well.
Nukular I've heard. Realator? Spell check certainly does't like it. Realtor? Regulator?
Yes, for realtor. They add in a syllable. Maybe if I spelled it "ree-la-tor."
Post by: teen persuasion on October 05, 2018, 07:19:25 AM
Post by: GuitarStv on October 05, 2018, 07:49:03 AM
There's a pronounciation one that has always bothered me:
homogenous
Some people insist in using the pronounciation "homo-genius" rather than ho-mo-gen-us". This has always bothered me.
But homogenEous is a word! According to the OED, homogenEous is the correct, older way and "homogenous" is the "erroneous" version. (Though of course language evolves and so forth -- it does seem homogenEous has precedent.)
Homogenous is also a real word, but it historically it has been used in biology to describe organisms with a common ancestor.
By the way, I had no idea about this before, and I think I always used the two interchangeably! :-) Just got curious and looked it up.
My world has been rocked to it's core. :P
Post by: Paul der Krake on October 05, 2018, 10:20:41 AM
Post by: Cwadda on October 06, 2018, 12:36:45 PM
"I literally can't do anything."
"I'm so single it literally hurts."
Post by: GuitarStv on October 06, 2018, 04:57:04 PM
Its*
Well, that's embarrassing.
Post by: Davnasty on October 06, 2018, 07:38:01 PM
Its*
Well, that's embarrassing.
Just blame auto-correct, no one has to admit to there mistakes anymore.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 07, 2018, 08:45:29 AM
Its*
Well, that's embarrassing.
Just blame auto-correct, no one has to admit to there mistakes anymore.
I saw what you did their.
Post by: Dicey on October 07, 2018, 09:31:25 AM
They're is no there their anymore.Its*
Well, that's embarrassing.
Just blame auto-correct, no one has to admit to there mistakes anymore.
I saw what you did their.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on October 08, 2018, 05:09:36 AM
I went to the store and spent too much money.
NOT
I went to the store and spent to much money.
Post by: sui generis on October 08, 2018, 08:35:27 AM
People don't seem to know how to use the word to and too.My phone auto corrects all "to"s to "too" nowadays, which is super annoying and I don't catch half the time. It also auto corrects all "but"s to "butt"s so my phone is basically making me seem like a 12 year old boy with poor grammar skills whenever I text anyone.
I went to the store and spent too much money.
NOT
I went to the store and spent to much money.
Post by: Paul der Krake on October 08, 2018, 08:44:17 AM
That's ducking annoying.People don't seem to know how to use the word to and too.My phone auto corrects all "to"s to "too" nowadays, which is super annoying and I don't catch half the time. It also auto corrects all "but"s to "butt"s so my phone is basically making me seem like a 12 year old boy with poor grammar skills whenever I text anyone.
I went to the store and spent too much money.
NOT
I went to the store and spent to much money.
Post by: teen persuasion on October 11, 2018, 06:50:20 PM
I could see "lockdown", or "lock-in" (the kids are locked in until everything is clear, but "lockout"? That reads to me as if the kids are locked out of the buildings.
Maybe it's just counterintuitive to me. But I'd also like the word to go away because it's beyond ridiculous that the concept is even something I should have to worry about as a parent of students, a parent of a teacher's aide and of a school staff member, and a wife of a teacher/sometimes volunteer first responder.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 11, 2018, 07:01:00 PM
Lockout, as in "the schools are on lockout due to an armed gunman in the vicinity." That's the way the news was phrasing the story yesterday.
I could see "lockdown", or "lock-in" (the kids are locked in until everything is clear, but "lockout"? That reads to me as if the kids are locked out of the buildings.
Maybe it's just counterintuitive to me. But I'd also like the word to go away because it's beyond ridiculous that the concept is even something I should have to worry about as a parent of students, a parent of a teacher's aide and of a school staff member, and a wife of a teacher/sometimes volunteer first responder.
I think they used the wrong word. Lockout is a labour term - unions go on strike, management does lockouts and brings in scab labour.
The schools were on lock-down.
Post by: Freckles on October 17, 2018, 03:17:20 PM
(Because god forbid we just have some serious gun control laws and keep our children safe in their schools by keeping guns and murderers out of the schools.)
Here, I just took a picture of the poster on my classroom wall for you.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 17, 2018, 05:49:35 PM
Oh, no, this is not a misusage. The terminology is very specific. Lockdown and lockout mean different things and trigger different behaviors on the part of the students and school staff. The staff and the kids are trained on the terminologies and behaviors to follow the specific words. We have videos, posters, drills. It's all rather serious and not talked about flippantly.
(Because god forbid we just have some serious gun control laws and keep our children safe in their schools by keeping guns and murderers out of the schools.)
Here, I just took a picture of the poster on my classroom wall for you.
I had never heard lockout used this way - holy cow.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on October 18, 2018, 08:52:15 AM
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on October 18, 2018, 10:16:53 AM
Using the word 'conversate' instead of conversation. UGH!
Conversation is a noun.
Converse is a verb.
Conversate is bullshit.
Post by: bestname on October 18, 2018, 10:20:21 AM
Post by: caffeine on October 18, 2018, 10:24:53 AM
Post by: HBFIRE on October 18, 2018, 10:26:53 AM
Ironic (also used incorrectly with high frequency)
Irregardless
Annoying phrases
I can't even
It is what it is
Any sentence starting with "honestly"
Just sayin'
Could care less
No offense but
Post by: Morning Glory on October 18, 2018, 01:10:11 PM
"commentate" makes me go similarly crazy. Commenting is not good enough, you have to commentate. Fancy!Explicate. I have actually seen this in professional literature. I find it pretentious af.
Post by: bestname on October 18, 2018, 02:23:58 PM
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on October 19, 2018, 06:47:37 AM
I'm too intellectual to refer to something, I reference it instead.
Actually, this brings up an annoying problem with the English language. We are taught as elementary schoolers that it's improper to end a sentence with a preposition, but then we have copious phrasal verbs consisting of a verb+preposition that are functionally inseparable. For example, "put" does not mean the same thing as "put up" which also does not mean the same thing as "put up with". So, we get fun jokes mocking the stupid rules, such as "The rule which forbids ending a sentence in a preposition is the type of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put."
Your comment reminded me of this problem, because using the word "reference" instead of "refer to" is a handy way of avoiding a phrasal verb altogether. To me, it sounds far more conversational to say "Who did you reference?" vs. "To whom did you refer?", and no on can jump on your case for ending a sentence in a preposition, as they might if you said "Who did you refer to?"
Post by: Paul der Krake on October 19, 2018, 07:30:09 PM
Actually, this brings up an annoying problem with the English language. We are taught as elementary schoolers that it's improper to end a sentence with a preposition, but then we have copious phrasal verbs consisting of a verb+preposition that are functionally inseparable. For example, "put" does not mean the same thing as "put up" which also does not mean the same thing as "put up with". So, we get fun jokes mocking the stupid rules, such as "The rule which forbids ending a sentence in a preposition is the type of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put."I see we listen to the same podcasts. Carry on, good Sir.
Post by: calimom on October 19, 2018, 07:34:37 PM
:) :) :)
Post by: Roadrunner53 on October 21, 2018, 11:47:08 AM
Post by: HBFIRE on October 21, 2018, 12:54:02 PM
Was watching a TV show that sells things. The host of the show took a call from a buyer. The host asks "have you bought this item before?" Person on the phone says "Yes, I have botten them before."
Geesh. I hope someone corrected his spelling of "boughten".
Post by: BlueHouse on November 02, 2018, 05:44:13 PM
I find it insulting when someone modifies what I write, and then implies that I was wrong, instead of that they have a different take on the situation or that they want to be funny. It's not funny to tell someone that their opinion is wrong.
cue someone "fixing" something in this statement. Thanks.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on November 12, 2018, 02:29:19 PM
Many mispronounce "Realtor."
They say "Realator."
I wish their mispronunciation would go away.
What can't they pronounce the word correctly?
Post by: calimom on November 12, 2018, 02:34:37 PM
Many mispronounce "realtor."
They say "realator."
I wish their mispronunciation would go away.
What can't they pronounce the word correctly?
It's a lost cause when those within the industry pronounce it that way! Is it correct to capitalize Realtor? I've seen it that way. We don't really say Lawyer or Crane Operator in written communication.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on November 12, 2018, 02:36:10 PM
The weirdest mispronunciation I have heard was intestines, pronounced with a long I for the second i, so it rhymed with vines. This was an actual doctor who pronounced it that way.
I have heard this mispronunciation more than once.
Post by: ketchup on November 12, 2018, 02:40:22 PM
Awful.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on November 12, 2018, 02:45:45 PM
Many mispronounce "realtor."
They say "realator."
I wish their mispronunciation would go away.
What can't they pronounce the word correctly?
It's a lost cause when those within the industry pronounce it that way! Is it correct to capitalize Realtor?I've seen it that way. We don't really say Lawyer or Crane Operator in written communication.
Yes.
I misspelled it.
The stylebook says Realtor is supposed to be capitalized. ... "Realtor: The term real estate agent is preferred. Use Realtor only if there is a reason to indicate that the individual is a member of the National Association of Realtors."
Realtor is a trademark — that's why it's capitalized - Mail Tribune
mailtribune/news/since.../realtor-is-a-trademark-amp-8212-that-s-why-it-s-capitalize...
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on November 12, 2018, 02:50:40 PM
People don't seem to know how to use the word to and too.
I went to the store and spent too much money.
NOT
I went to the store and spent to much money.
I've read too many misuses of "lose" and "loose" and "effect" and "affect."
Post by: calimom on November 12, 2018, 03:14:20 PM
Many mispronounce "realtor."
They say "realator."
I wish their mispronunciation would go away.
What can't they pronounce the word correctly?
It's a lost cause when those within the industry pronounce it that way! Is it correct to capitalize Realtor?I've seen it that way. We don't really say Lawyer or Crane Operator in written communication.
Yes.
I misspelled it.
The stylebook says Realtor is supposed to be capitalized. ... "Realtor: The term real estate agent is preferred. Use Realtor only if there is a reason to indicate that the individual is a member of the National Association of Realtors."
Realtor is a trademark — that's why it's capitalized - Mail Tribune
mailtribune/news/since.../realtor-is-a-trademark-amp-8212-that-s-why-it-s-capitalize...
Thanks, @John Galt for the clarification. I'd always wondered why it was sometimes capitalized and sometimes not.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 12, 2018, 07:40:05 PM
The weirdest mispronunciation I have heard was intestines, pronounced with a long I for the second i, so it rhymed with vines. This was an actual doctor who pronounced it that way.
I have heard this mispronunciation more than once.
Lots of people say it that way. It may be a regional variation. All the biologists I know use the hard I at the end.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on November 13, 2018, 01:59:52 AM
Post by: Dee on November 13, 2018, 06:56:17 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 14, 2018, 05:52:38 PM
The word "tireless" gets to me because I take it too literally. I saw a communication using the word "relentless" today and I much preferred. Most "tireless" pursuits are not literally tireless -- people get tired but keep at it anyway. Relentlessly.
Such word precision. Love it!
And it reminded me - I hate the "give 110%" thing. You can't give more than 100%. 100 % is everything.
Post by: Dee on November 14, 2018, 08:33:15 PM
Post by: EvenSteven on November 14, 2018, 08:53:10 PM
Quote
The word "tireless" gets to me because I take it too literally. I saw a communication using the word "relentless" today and I much preferred. Most "tireless" pursuits are not literally tireless -- people get tired but keep at it anyway. Relentlessly.
This word substitution is only sometimes appropriate. For instance a kayak is a tireless vehicle, but not necessarily relentless.
Post by: Crease on November 15, 2018, 07:34:38 AM
Also i.e. and e.g. are not interchangeable.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 15, 2018, 10:50:49 AM
Not a word/phrase, but when I wear my lawyer cap I get a visceral reaction to missing Oxford commas.
Also i.e. and e.g. are not interchangeable.
Ah, Oxford commas. In the song black magic woman, is the woman black and magic, or is she a woman of unknown colour who practices black magic?
i.e. and e.g., I found this goodie
https://www.grammarly.com/blog/know-your-latin-i-e-vs-e-g/ (https://www.grammarly.com/blog/know-your-latin-i-e-vs-e-g/)
I had to google SWAK. Personally I like the Spinners and Weavers Association of Korea, for my area it could be Spinners and Weavers Association of Kingston. ;-)
And of course as a biologist, my gut reaction is that Latin should be italicized, so they are not i.e. and e.g., they are i.e. and e.g.
Post by: Dee on November 15, 2018, 06:09:06 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 15, 2018, 07:45:59 PM
Good point, EvenSteven. I don't have a problem with tireless objects, I have a problem with humans said to have tirelessly fought for a cause. In most every case, they were relentless in their endeavours despite being tired, even exhausted at times.
He's trying to be
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on November 17, 2018, 10:15:25 AM
There's a pronounciation one that has always bothered me:
homogenous
Some people insist in using the pronunciation "homo-genius" rather than ho-mo-gen-us". This has always bothered me.
But homogenEous is a word! According to the OED, homogenEous is the correct, older way and "homogenous" is the "erroneous" version. (Though of course language evolves and so forth -- it does seem homogenEous has precedent.)
Homogenous is also a real word, but it historically it has been used in biology to describe organisms with a common ancestor.
By the way, I had no idea about this before, and I think I always used the two interchangeably! :-) Just got curious and looked it up.
Fascinating. I had no idea that homogenous and homogeneous were alternate spellings of the same word, much less that homogenous used to be a word with a different meaning altogether.
Here's one I assume we can all agree on: People should stop saying "nukular" when what they mean is "nuclear".
+1
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on November 17, 2018, 10:25:55 AM
Post by: calimom on November 18, 2018, 12:20:28 PM
I've read a few posts (not on this site) in which the correct word was "tenet" but "tenant" was used instead.
Oh I've seen "MMM tenants" used a number of times here. That spelling is only applicable if one might be a rent paying member of the MMM HQ.
Post by: BlueHouse on November 19, 2018, 12:41:39 PM
I've read a few posts (not on this site) in which the correct word was "tenet" but "tenant" was used instead.
I live in an urban area where there are unfortunately, way too many murders. I've seen on more than one occasion, a notice of an upcoming 'Visual" (vigil). This is what happens when people don't read or see words in written form.
Post by: ketchup on November 19, 2018, 01:15:42 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/boneappleteaI've read a few posts (not on this site) in which the correct word was "tenet" but "tenant" was used instead.
I live in an urban area where there are unfortunately, way too many murders. I've seen on more than one occasion, a notice of an upcoming 'Visual" (vigil). This is what happens when people don't read or see words in written form.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 19, 2018, 08:06:38 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/boneappleteaI've read a few posts (not on this site) in which the correct word was "tenet" but "tenant" was used instead.
I live in an urban area where there are unfortunately, way too many murders. I've seen on more than one occasion, a notice of an upcoming 'Visual" (vigil). This is what happens when people don't read or see words in written form.
Oh my. I could only take a bit, that is just . . . . . . .
Post by: lollylegs on November 20, 2018, 01:08:37 AM
"we are a 'no surprises' organisation"
"one of our core values is 'no surprises'
"there are 'no surprises' in our team"
I'm over it already...can't stand the corporate BS...
Post by: AnswerIs42 on November 20, 2018, 02:57:29 AM
a new phrase has started being used at work from management over recent weeks -
"we are a 'no surprises' organisation"
"one of our core values is 'no surprises'
"there are 'no surprises' in our team"
I'm over it already...can't stand the corporate BS...
"A heart that's full up like a landfill, A job that slowly kills you, Bruises that won't heal"
"I'll take a quiet life, a handshake of carbon monoxide. No alarms and no surprises, please."
I think they're trying to tell you something...
Post by: Roadrunner53 on November 20, 2018, 04:27:55 AM
Post by: Dreamer on November 20, 2018, 07:27:37 AM
Here’s another thing... it’s very particular. Sometimes people over annunciate all of the letters in ‘Important’, especially the center ‘T’. It seems to mostly be upper class white women over 35... but that’s just a total random observation. There are at least two people on regular podcasts that I listen to who do it and it ruins the whole episode when I hear them over annunciating that ‘T’...
Funny you should say this. Lately I've found myself pronouncing important this way, and I really have no idea why! I am over 35 too. Hmmm. Although it's not the typcial pronunciation, it is apparently the correct pronunciation, according to the dictionary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uu9Kb4oN3EQ
Post by: JanetJackson on November 20, 2018, 01:49:34 PM
Here’s another thing... it’s very particular. Sometimes people over annunciate all of the letters in ‘Important’, especially the center ‘T’. It seems to mostly be upper class white women over 35... but that’s just a total random observation. There are at least two people on regular podcasts that I listen to who do it and it ruins the whole episode when I hear them over annunciating that ‘T’...
Funny you should say this. Lately I've found myself pronouncing important this way, and I really have no idea why! I am over 35 too. Hmmm. Although it's not the typcial pronunciation, it is apparently the correct pronunciation, according to the dictionary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uu9Kb4oN3EQ
Hahahah, it's ok! It's SUCH a specific and trivial thing for me to be annoyed about. I am also certain it's the correct pronunciation.
But yikes does it grind my gears.
Chris Guillebeau...however his last name is spelled from the Podcase 'Side Hustle School' does this with almost every single word and although I really enjoy his Podcast, I catch myself flinching every time he does it.
I think perhaps I am the problem.
I turn 35 in a week or so... we'll see what happens. I am a lower class white woman... that just might check enough of the boxes to turn me into an over-enunciator!
Post by: BlueMR2 on November 26, 2018, 04:56:05 PM
Post by: marble_faun on November 26, 2018, 05:34:45 PM
Now that football season is back in full swing, so is my biggest pet peeve. "We won last night". Uh, no... There was no WE in that win. YOU were sitting on the couch watching THEM win. THEY did the work. YOU did not. YOU do not get to claim credit by saying "WE won". If you really want to say "WE", then you need to put the beer down, get your sorry rear off the couch, and go put in some work that you can then actually claim credit on.
Eh, that doesn't bug me. It's just a way of expressing a sense of group loyalty. It's similar to how people from America/UK/Russia/etc. who weren't even alive during World War II might say "We won the war." They don't need to specify that they weren't personally storming the beaches at Normandy or planting Victory Gardens.
Post by: soccerluvof4 on November 27, 2018, 05:45:22 AM
Post by: bestname on November 27, 2018, 02:20:35 PM
Post by: ketchup on November 27, 2018, 02:45:05 PM
Along the over-enunciating lines: people who pronounce the "th" in clothes make me (sorry) cringe.Also, pronouncing "mature" so that it rhymes with "manure."
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 27, 2018, 04:00:30 PM
Along the over-enunciating lines: people who pronounce the "th" in clothes make me (sorry) cringe.What do you say instead of the "th"?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 27, 2018, 04:01:55 PM
Along the over-enunciating lines: people who pronounce the "th" in clothes make me (sorry) cringe.Also, pronouncing "mature" so that it rhymes with "manure."
But of course they rhyme. The second syllable is accented for both. The "u" is not quite the "u" of "your" How do you say them?
Post by: sui generis on November 27, 2018, 04:30:15 PM
Along the over-enunciating lines: people who pronounce the "th" in clothes make me (sorry) cringe.Also, pronouncing "mature" so that it rhymes with "manure."
But of course they rhyme. The second syllable is accented for both. The "u" is not quite the "u" of "your" How do you say them?
Mature is (approximately) ma-CHUR and manure is ma-NEW-er. I think ketchup is saying some people say ma-CHEW-er (a bit of an exaggeration there, but I have heard it basically this way at times and do think is odd). Depending on region the CH sound in mature might just be a regular T sound, but most often where I live at least, people turn that into a CH sound.
Post by: Morning Glory on November 27, 2018, 05:27:24 PM
I am used to the ch sound in mature. It is annoying when people turn it into three syllables, usually with the t sound, like mah-too-er.Along the over-enunciating lines: people who pronounce the "th" in clothes make me (sorry) cringe.Also, pronouncing "mature" so that it rhymes with "manure."
But of course they rhyme. The second syllable is accented for both. The "u" is not quite the "u" of "your" How do you say them?
Mature is (approximately) ma-CHUR and manure is ma-NEW-er. I think ketchup is saying some people say ma-CHEW-er (a bit of an exaggeration there, but I have heard it basically this way at times and do think is odd). Depending on region the CH sound in mature might just be a regular T sound, but most often where I live at least, people turn that into a CH sound.
When did they start calling fake wool "Sherpa". It seems like it used to be called something else. It bothers me for some reason.
Post by: sui generis on November 27, 2018, 05:45:49 PM
I have not heard this but I would be totally bothered by this too, since it's a culture/ethnic group and I don't know of any connection fake wool has to the Sherpa people.
When did they start calling fake wool "Sherpa". It seems like it used to be called something else. It bothers me for some reason.
Post by: JanetJackson on November 27, 2018, 05:48:53 PM
Along the over-enunciating lines: people who pronounce the "th" in clothes make me (sorry) cringe.
I feel the same! Ha.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on November 28, 2018, 12:07:58 PM
Along the over-enunciating lines: people who pronounce the "th" in clothes make me (sorry) cringe.
I feel the same! Ha.
Speaking of "th," I've heard "height" mispronounced more than any other word.
"Length" and "width" and "breadth" end in "th" so I easily understand why "height" is frequently mispronounced "heigth."
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on November 28, 2018, 12:26:08 PM
I've read a few posts (not on this site) in which the correct word was "tenet" but "tenant" was used instead.
I live in an urban area where there are unfortunately, way too many murders. I've seen on more than one occasion, a notice of an upcoming 'Visual" (vigil). This is what happens when people don't read or see words in written form.
Patty-o Chairs For Sale
^
I saw this sign at a garage sale, a misspelling I cannot forget because it's so amusing.
Post by: ketchup on November 28, 2018, 12:50:58 PM
This is what I meant. Perhaps I explained it badly.I am used to the ch sound in mature. It is annoying when people turn it into three syllables, usually with the t sound, like mah-too-er.Along the over-enunciating lines: people who pronounce the "th" in clothes make me (sorry) cringe.Also, pronouncing "mature" so that it rhymes with "manure."
But of course they rhyme. The second syllable is accented for both. The "u" is not quite the "u" of "your" How do you say them?
Mature is (approximately) ma-CHUR and manure is ma-NEW-er. I think ketchup is saying some people say ma-CHEW-er (a bit of an exaggeration there, but I have heard it basically this way at times and do think is odd). Depending on region the CH sound in mature might just be a regular T sound, but most often where I live at least, people turn that into a CH sound.
When did they start calling fake wool "Sherpa". It seems like it used to be called something else. It bothers me for some reason.
Post by: Tyson on November 28, 2018, 01:39:02 PM
Jesus Christ I've never heard a more inane saying.
From now on, my response to this particular bit of vacuity will be:
"Actually, it isn't what it isn't".
Post by: dandarc on November 28, 2018, 02:14:01 PM
Bawld peanuts are delicious.I've read a few posts (not on this site) in which the correct word was "tenet" but "tenant" was used instead.
I live in an urban area where there are unfortunately, way too many murders. I've seen on more than one occasion, a notice of an upcoming 'Visual" (vigil). This is what happens when people don't read or see words in written form.
Patty-o Chairs For Sale
^
I saw this sign at a garage sale, a misspelling I cannot forget because it's so amusing.
Post by: Samuel on November 28, 2018, 02:35:36 PM
"It is what it is".
Jesus Christ I've never heard a more inane saying.
From now on, my response to this particular bit of vacuity will be:
"Actually, it isn't what it isn't".
I get why people get annoyed at this one but I like it and use it (mostly internally) on occasion. Yes, it's tautological, but it's not always inane. I actually find it pretty deep when deployed properly.
In my use its a reminder that things/events/problems/people are what they are and aren't what I hope/wish/expect/fear them to be, an extension of meditative practice noting when I've caught myself not dealing with reality on reality's terms.
Post by: ketchup on November 28, 2018, 02:54:07 PM
I prefer the similar Spanish phrase "Que será, será." ("What will be, will be.") But either way, the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club (https://xkcd.com/703/)."It is what it is".
Jesus Christ I've never heard a more inane saying.
From now on, my response to this particular bit of vacuity will be:
"Actually, it isn't what it isn't".
I get why people get annoyed at this one but I like it and use it (mostly internally) on occasion. Yes, it's tautological, but it's not always inane. I actually find it pretty deep when deployed properly.
In my use its a reminder that things/events/problems/people are what they are and aren't what I hope/wish/expect/fear them to be, an extension of meditative practice noting when I've caught myself not dealing with reality on reality's terms.
Post by: Tyson on November 28, 2018, 03:19:39 PM
"It is what it is".
Jesus Christ I've never heard a more inane saying.
From now on, my response to this particular bit of vacuity will be:
"Actually, it isn't what it isn't".
I get why people get annoyed at this one but I like it and use it (mostly internally) on occasion. Yes, it's tautological, but it's not always inane. I actually find it pretty deep when deployed properly.
In my use its a reminder that things/events/problems/people are what they are and aren't what I hope/wish/expect/fear them to be, an extension of meditative practice noting when I've caught myself not dealing with reality on reality's terms.
On the other hand, I hear it mostly coming from the mouths of people too inarticulate to express an 'actual' deep thought.
Post by: BlueHouse on December 08, 2018, 03:43:13 PM
(Maryland / Terrible)
Post by: Dicey on December 09, 2018, 10:32:58 PM
Repeat after me: "close". Of course, if you use the word "clothing" the "th" sound reappears. Totally logical.Along the over-enunciating lines: people who pronounce the "th" in clothes make me (sorry) cringe.What do you say instead of the "th"?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 10, 2018, 07:21:23 AM
Repeat after me: "close". Of course, if you use the word "clothing" the "th" sound reappears. Totally logical.Along the over-enunciating lines: people who pronounce the "th" in clothes make me (sorry) cringe.What do you say instead of the "th"?
Local dialects and pronunciation. I say the "th" in both words, but the "th" in clothes is much softer than the "th" in clothing. If someone said "I just bought some close" I would have to take a few seconds to process it.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on December 11, 2018, 05:43:52 AM
Post by: daverobev on December 20, 2018, 11:46:22 AM
One. Two. That's all.
Post by: GreenSheep on December 20, 2018, 12:52:24 PM
Also... The trendy new phrase for agreeing with someone seems to be "Hundred percent!!" Maybe it's the frequency with which I hear it, but it drives me nuts, and I can't wait until this trend dies.
Post by: soccerluvof4 on December 20, 2018, 03:59:54 PM
Post by: Dee on December 21, 2018, 08:14:11 PM
Post by: mrmoonymartian on December 21, 2018, 08:32:09 PM
Post by: nnls on December 21, 2018, 09:18:51 PM
"I could care less" when they actually mean "I could NOT care less".
I have never heard anyone say "I could care less" its always "I couldn't care less" here in Australia (well in the parts Ive lived)
Post by: mrmoonymartian on December 21, 2018, 09:31:52 PM
Yes, we do it right here. It's an american thing to get it wrong - that's why I'm edumicating them."I could care less" when they actually mean "I could NOT care less".
I have never heard anyone say "I could care less" its always "I couldn't care less" here in Australia (well in the parts Ive lived)
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=I%20could%20care%20less
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/could-care-less-versus-couldnt-care-less
https://www.dictionary.com/e/could-care-less/
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 22, 2018, 06:35:38 AM
Yes, we do it right here. It's an american thing to get it wrong - that's why I'm edumicating them."I could care less" when they actually mean "I could NOT care less".
I have never heard anyone say "I could care less" its always "I couldn't care less" here in Australia (well in the parts Ive lived)
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=I%20could%20care%20less
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/could-care-less-versus-couldnt-care-less
https://www.dictionary.com/e/could-care-less/
Or we could just say "Could I care less?" Rhetorical question, no I can't.
Post by: phildonnia on January 07, 2019, 04:27:23 PM
"Maybe I should just invest in the 75-inch screen..."
Unless you own a sports bar, that's not an investment. Buy expensive toys if you can afford them, but if you use the word "invest", it sounds like you're trying to make a stupid purchase sound like a wise financial move.
Post by: pdxbator on January 07, 2019, 07:53:05 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on January 08, 2019, 07:56:58 AM
Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!
This annoys me, too. Our culture has a very strange relationship with death. It's one of the only things that will, no matter what, happen to every single one of us, and yet we all act like we can somehow escape it. Changing the word you use for something doesn't change the thing itself. Better to accept it and live your life knowing it's coming. For example, I read somewhere that someone calculated how many more visits he will have with his parents, given that he visits twice a year and their remaining life expectancy is about 10 years. Kinda puts things in perspective.
Most people these days have never even seen a dead body (except maybe at a viewing, after its been all cleaned up, makeup applied, etc.), but not very long ago, the body was often kept in the home just before the funeral. Stretched out on the dining room table, even. It used to be common for children to die, and for adults to die in places other than a hospital, and while of course I wouldn't wish for any of that to come back, we've very much institutionalized death... to the point where it's almost not even real for most people. People are shocked and horrified when Grandma dies at age 98.
To relate this to MMM, this means too few people have financial plans for after they die. Families end up fighting over what's left, no one can afford the funeral, the "correct" heir gets nothing, etc. And people don't live their lives with intention, since they somehow believe they have an infinite amount of time.
Post by: Dicey on January 09, 2019, 08:25:19 PM
Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
Post by: Nicholas Carter on January 10, 2019, 06:44:09 AM
They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!Well he sure not future!
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on January 10, 2019, 07:43:07 AM
Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
Post by: FIRE@50 on January 10, 2019, 07:46:33 AM
I get super annoyed when I'm having a conversation similar to this and someone interrupts to say, "That is morbid."Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
No shit Sherlock.
Post by: Dicey on January 10, 2019, 07:54:27 AM
Uh, one has a hard "t" sound at the end of it and one doesn't?Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
Post by: OtherJen on January 10, 2019, 08:08:09 AM
"I could care less" when they actually mean "I could NOT care less".
I have never heard anyone say "I could care less" its always "I couldn't care less" here in Australia (well in the parts Ive lived)
I’ve heard that one since my childhood in the 1980s. It was deemed “cool,” which meant that I heard it from my 6th grade classmates approximately 25 times per day. I considered it annoying and confusing even then, but asking “don’t you mean couldn’t care less?” made me even less popular than I already was. Sigh.
Post by: OtherJen on January 10, 2019, 08:12:04 AM
I’ve given up hope that people will stop saying “ATM machine.”
Post by: GreenSheep on January 10, 2019, 08:18:27 AM
Uh, one has a hard "t" sound at the end of it and one doesn't?Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
This one has me scratching my head, too. I hear/say "past" and "passed" the same way. Same as "last," only the sound of the first letter is different, of course. Dicey, I think you're from the US, right? So am I, and I'm trying to think of a time when I've heard these words pronounced the way you mentioned. Maybe it's a very specific region?
Post by: Morning Glory on January 10, 2019, 08:30:27 AM
I keep seeing statements such as “I was gifted [object].” No, you were GIVEN the object, possibly as a gift. English already had a word for this concept, folks.
I’ve given up hope that people will stop saying “ATM machine.”
I hate "gifted" too. I see it more around this forum than anywhere else. I blame Frugalwoods. (I otherwise really like her blog but I think she started this whole using "gift" as a verb trend).
Post by: Dicey on January 10, 2019, 09:16:42 AM
Yes, I am US based. Passed has two esssses and ends with a softer "d". Past has one ess and ends with a crisp "t", so it has a harder sound. Try saying "Pass the potatoes" vs. "Past the potatoes." Then say "At dinner, the potatoes were passed around the table." If you say "past around the table", then you know exactly what I'm talking about.Uh, one has a hard "t" sound at the end of it and one doesn't?Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
This one has me scratching my head, too. I hear/say "past" and "passed" the same way. Same as "last," only the sound of the first letter is different, of course. Dicey, I think you're from the US, right? So am I, and I'm trying to think of a time when I've heard these words pronounced the way you mentioned. Maybe it's a very specific region?
Another one is yes-ti-day instead of yes-ter-day. Ugh, just sounds gross.
Post by: sui generis on January 10, 2019, 10:41:35 AM
Another one is yes-ti-day instead of yes-ter-day. Ugh, just sounds gross.
I'm so glad I haven't heard that one! What about pronouncing "mischievous" mis-CHEE-vee-us? I feel like that's the most common pronunciation, although there is clearly no i or ee after the v. It's so common, I'm halfway used to it, but still notice (and judge!) when someone pronounces it that way.
OTOH, I'm no saint, as I don't pronounce Wednesday Wed-nes-day. Don't we all just basically say, "Wends-day" (or maybe "Wens-Day")? I just did a bit of googling and see articles about how the d became silent, but I don't think that really covers it, because most people also don't pronounce the e between the n and the s (like that would be "Wen-es-day"?). It's a more significant departure from the spelling than just one silent letter.
Post by: Cool Friend on January 10, 2019, 11:57:15 AM
Have a good what?????
Post by: Mississippi Mudstache on January 10, 2019, 12:46:09 PM
Yes, I am US based. Passed has two esssses and ends with a softer "d". Past has one ess and ends with a crisp "t", so it has a harder sound. Try saying "Pass the potatoes" vs. "Past the potatoes." Then say "At dinner, the potatoes were passed around the table." If you say "past around the table", then you know exactly what I'm talking about.Uh, one has a hard "t" sound at the end of it and one doesn't?Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
This one has me scratching my head, too. I hear/say "past" and "passed" the same way. Same as "last," only the sound of the first letter is different, of course. Dicey, I think you're from the US, right? So am I, and I'm trying to think of a time when I've heard these words pronounced the way you mentioned. Maybe it's a very specific region?
Another one is yes-ti-day instead of yes-ter-day. Ugh, just sounds gross.
I would love you hear you say the two words to see if I could tell a difference. My tongue is incapable of following an "s" with a soft "d". I think you'd be sorely disappointed by the way the word "passed" is pronounced by the entire population of the Southeastern U.S.
Post by: mrmoonymartian on January 10, 2019, 02:30:27 PM
Don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but "Have a good one."Day.
Have a good what?????
Post by: Davnasty on January 10, 2019, 02:41:14 PM
Life?Don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but "Have a good one."Day.
Have a good what?????
Post by: marble_faun on January 10, 2019, 02:45:57 PM
Yes, I am US based. Passed has two esssses and ends with a softer "d". Past has one ess and ends with a crisp "t", so it has a harder sound. Try saying "Pass the potatoes" vs. "Past the potatoes." Then say "At dinner, the potatoes were passed around the table." If you say "past around the table", then you know exactly what I'm talking about.Uh, one has a hard "t" sound at the end of it and one doesn't?Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
This one has me scratching my head, too. I hear/say "past" and "passed" the same way. Same as "last," only the sound of the first letter is different, of course. Dicey, I think you're from the US, right? So am I, and I'm trying to think of a time when I've heard these words pronounced the way you mentioned. Maybe it's a very specific region?
Another one is yes-ti-day instead of yes-ter-day. Ugh, just sounds gross.
I would love you hear you say the two words to see if I could tell a difference. My tongue is incapable of following an "s" with a soft "d". I think you'd be sorely disappointed by the way the word "passed" is pronounced by the entire population of the Southeastern U.S.
Same here. I say "passed" and "past" the same way, as I thought everyone did, and can't hear a difference in those examples.
The OED gives the same exact pronunciation for both: /pæst/ (or /pɑːst/ for Brits).
Post by: Miss Piggy on January 10, 2019, 06:12:09 PM
Same here. I say "passed" and "past" the same way, as I thought everyone did, and can't hear a difference in those examples.
Same here. I have NEVER heard any difference at all in the way those two words are pronounced.
Post by: Davnasty on January 10, 2019, 06:40:12 PM
Yes, I am US based. Passed has two esssses and ends with a softer "d". Past has one ess and ends with a crisp "t", so it has a harder sound. Try saying "Pass the potatoes" vs. "Past the potatoes." Then say "At dinner, the potatoes were passed around the table." If you say "past around the table", then you know exactly what I'm talking about.Uh, one has a hard "t" sound at the end of it and one doesn't?They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
This one has me scratching my head, too. I hear/say "past" and "passed" the same way. Same as "last," only the sound of the first letter is different, of course. Dicey, I think you're from the US, right? So am I, and I'm trying to think of a time when I've heard these words pronounced the way you mentioned. Maybe it's a very specific region?
Another one is yes-ti-day instead of yes-ter-day. Ugh, just sounds gross.
I would love you hear you say the two words to see if I could tell a difference. My tongue is incapable of following an "s" with a soft "d". I think you'd be sorely disappointed by the way the word "passed" is pronounced by the entire population of the Southeastern U.S.
I've said each word out loud in several different sentences each and trying my best to enunciate I can tell a difference but just barely. I can't imagine noticing the difference in conversation. Maybe if someone was using a microphone and I was standing close to the speakers I could tell?
Post by: Dicey on January 10, 2019, 06:43:42 PM
Don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but "Have a good one."I kind of like the ambiguity of that one. I always consider tone in deciding if the speaker is being friendly-ish or wants me to FOAD.
Have a good what?????
Another one is yes-ti-day instead of yes-ter-day. Ugh, just sounds gross.
I'm so glad I haven't heard that one! What about pronouncing "mischievous" mis-CHEE-vee-us? I feel like that's the most common pronunciation, although there is clearly no i or ee after the v. It's so common, I'm halfway used to it, but still notice (and judge!) when someone pronounces it that way.
OTOH, I'm no saint, as I don't pronounce Wednesday Wed-nes-day. Don't we all just basically say, "Wends-day" (or maybe "Wens-Day")? I just did a bit of googling and see articles about how the d became silent, but I don't think that really covers it, because most people also don't pronounce the e between the n and the s (like that would be "Wen-es-day"?). It's a more significant departure from the spelling than just one silent letter.
Ooh, you totally got me on that one! I've been mis-reading it all my life. So how is it correctly pronounced? Nevermind, google is my friend. Mind blown.
As for the pronunciation of that day in the middle of the week, who cares? Once you've FIRE, all you need is "today", "tomorrow", and "yesterday".
Post by: zolotiyeruki on January 11, 2019, 07:11:50 AM
I'm so glad I haven't heard that one! What about pronouncing "mischievous" mis-CHEE-vee-us? I feel like that's the most common pronunciation, although there is clearly no i or ee after the v. It's so common, I'm halfway used to it, but still notice (and judge!) when someone pronounces it that way.As a kid, I always mispronounced mischievous the incorrect way. As an adult, I say it correctly, but I still think the wrong way sounds better. Perhaps it's because the wrong pronunciation rhymes with "devious," and those two words go so well with each other.
Post by: ketchup on January 11, 2019, 10:02:42 AM
I used it when I worked the Drive-thru of a Dairy Queen in high school. I meant I could build the habit instead of always having to remember to say morning, day, or night (my schedule was not consistent). Saying "Have a good night." to people at 10am by mistake got old really fast.Don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but "Have a good one."I kind of like the ambiguity of that one. I always consider tone in deciding if the speaker is being friendly-ish or wants me to FOAD.
Have a good what?????
Post by: GuitarStv on January 11, 2019, 10:51:28 AM
Life?Don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but "Have a good one."Day.
Have a good what?????
One.
Post by: shelivesthedream on January 11, 2019, 12:17:36 PM
Post by: frugalnacho on January 11, 2019, 12:26:26 PM
I have been reading various blogs that have pictures that can be enlarged. When did "Click to biggify" replace "Click to enlarge"? Biggify? Really?
Hah. My husband is a software developer and started his career in the early 80s. He and his friends almost always say "embiggen."
I just ignore it. :D
Why? It's a perfectly cromulent word.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 11, 2019, 03:46:41 PM
I saw "warp and woof" in an actual printed book yesterday.
"woof" is an equivalent to "weft", so warp and woof = warp and weft -> weaving
Was it a book on weaving?
Post by: shelivesthedream on January 12, 2019, 02:39:55 AM
I saw "warp and woof" in an actual printed book yesterday.
"woof" is an equivalent to "weft", so warp and woof = warp and weft -> weaving
Was it a book on weaving?
No, it was being used metaphorically. Is woof seriously a legitimate alternative to weft? I have read several books in which actual weaving features and have never heard it. I assumed it was an eggcorn.
Post by: soccerluvof4 on January 12, 2019, 04:04:36 AM
Yes, I am US based. Passed has two esssses and ends with a softer "d". Past has one ess and ends with a crisp "t", so it has a harder sound. Try saying "Pass the potatoes" vs. "Past the potatoes." Then say "At dinner, the potatoes were passed around the table." If you say "past around the table", then you know exactly what I'm talking about.Uh, one has a hard "t" sound at the end of it and one doesn't?Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
This one has me scratching my head, too. I hear/say "past" and "passed" the same way. Same as "last," only the sound of the first letter is different, of course. Dicey, I think you're from the US, right? So am I, and I'm trying to think of a time when I've heard these words pronounced the way you mentioned. Maybe it's a very specific region?
Another one is yes-ti-day instead of yes-ter-day. Ugh, just sounds gross.
I would love you hear you say the two words to see if I could tell a difference. My tongue is incapable of following an "s" with a soft "d". I think you'd be sorely disappointed by the way the word "passed" is pronounced by the entire population of the Southeastern U.S.
Same here. I say "passed" and "past" the same way, as I thought everyone did, and can't hear a difference in those examples.
The OED gives the same exact pronunciation for both: /pæst/ (or /pɑːst/ for Brits).
I am with you on this one. !
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 12, 2019, 07:15:53 AM
I saw "warp and woof" in an actual printed book yesterday.
"woof" is an equivalent to "weft", so warp and woof = warp and weft -> weaving
Was it a book on weaving?
No, it was being used metaphorically. Is woof seriously a legitimate alternative to weft? I have read several books in which actual weaving features and have never heard it. I assumed it was an eggcorn.
It is an old usage, but yes. It probably dates back to when English spelling was wildly variable and so were accents.
Ah, Google gives us an answer
https://www.dailywritingtips.com/woof-or-weft/
Post by: zolotiyeruki on January 13, 2019, 08:08:18 PM
Quote from: RetiredAt63
It is an old usage, but yes. It probably dates back to when English spelling was wildly variable and so were accents.ah, so little has changed then... :)
Post by: LilyFleur on January 14, 2019, 01:04:42 AM
Just, no.
I live in an uber-cool California city, and no one I know (from age 13 to 80), says "Cali."
Post by: Freckles on January 14, 2019, 10:55:16 PM
Post by: gerardc on March 19, 2019, 10:25:59 PM
"I'll do a burrito bowl with rice, then I'll do black beans, then can I do... X"
instead of "having" or "getting". It's like an activity for them.
Post by: Paul der Krake on March 19, 2019, 10:33:32 PM
Cali.Careful now. We have a prominent forum member who says Cali a lot.
Just, no.
I live in an uber-cool California city, and no one I know (from age 13 to 80), says "Cali."
Post by: sui generis on March 19, 2019, 11:08:16 PM
Cali.Careful now. We have a prominent forum member who says Cali a lot.
Just, no.
I live in an uber-cool California city, and no one I know (from age 13 to 80), says "Cali."
Are they from here? Cuz I gotta agree... the word just grates on me as a native. If any of my native friends or family used it, I'm pretty sure all the rest of us would wonder wtf was wrong with them and ask if they'd been hit on the head or something. It's just... weird.
Also Frisco and San Fran for San Francisco. In writing, I use SF and you can say or write the City, but not the other two. As someone who goes solely by my nickname, it's not that I (our anyone else I know) are against nicknames or abbreviations in general. It just doesn't feel right here.
Post by: Paul der Krake on March 19, 2019, 11:46:10 PM
*dips into popcorn bucket*
Post by: Dicey on March 20, 2019, 12:32:11 AM
As a native Cali-fornian, yes, yes, yes to all of the above. Although I believe it's "The City", with a tip of the hat and a nod to the late, great Herb Caen. I am glad he didn't live to see/hear the bastardization of our beautiful state's name. Though I'm sure his opinion on the subject would have been quite succinct and entertaining.Cali.Careful now. We have a prominent forum member who says Cali a lot.
Just, no.
I live in an uber-cool California city, and no one I know (from age 13 to 80), says "Cali."
Are they from here? Cuz I gotta agree... the word just grates on me as a native. If any of my native friends or family used it, I'm pretty sure all the rest of us would wonder wtf was wrong with them and ask if they'd been hit on the head or something. It's just... weird.
Also Frisco and San Fran for San Francisco. In writing, I use SF and you can say or write the City, but not the other two. As someone who goes solely by my nickname, it's not that I (our anyone else I know) are against nicknames or abbreviations in general. It just doesn't feel right here.
Post by: JanetJackson on March 20, 2019, 07:17:35 AM
Yes, I am US based. Passed has two esssses and ends with a softer "d". Past has one ess and ends with a crisp "t", so it has a harder sound. Try saying "Pass the potatoes" vs. "Past the potatoes." Then say "At dinner, the potatoes were passed around the table." If you say "past around the table", then you know exactly what I'm talking about.Uh, one has a hard "t" sound at the end of it and one doesn't?Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
This one has me scratching my head, too. I hear/say "past" and "passed" the same way. Same as "last," only the sound of the first letter is different, of course. Dicey, I think you're from the US, right? So am I, and I'm trying to think of a time when I've heard these words pronounced the way you mentioned. Maybe it's a very specific region?
Another one is yes-ti-day instead of yes-ter-day. Ugh, just sounds gross.
I would love you hear you say the two words to see if I could tell a difference. My tongue is incapable of following an "s" with a soft "d". I think you'd be sorely disappointed by the way the word "passed" is pronounced by the entire population of the Southeastern U.S.
Same here. I say "passed" and "past" the same way, as I thought everyone did, and can't hear a difference in those examples.
The OED gives the same exact pronunciation for both: /pæst/ (or /pɑːst/ for Brits).
I am with you on this one. !
This one is so interesting to me. I'm from a poor area of the rust belt and say PAST and PASSED the same as well. I also say PULL and POOL the same, regardless of having one friend who is incessantly trying to "help" me pronounce them differently. Hmmmm
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 20, 2019, 10:22:47 AM
Yes, I am US based. Passed has two esssses and ends with a softer "d". Past has one ess and ends with a crisp "t", so it has a harder sound. Try saying "Pass the potatoes" vs. "Past the potatoes." Then say "At dinner, the potatoes were passed around the table." If you say "past around the table", then you know exactly what I'm talking about.Uh, one has a hard "t" sound at the end of it and one doesn't?Saying old aunt Ida "passed". I have a lot of family members that use this as a pleasant (?) way to say died. For some reason it just really annoys me. I work in cancer care and see lot of sick people who will die, and saying passed doesn't sugar coat it. They died!They died and now they're dead. I especially hate it when they pronounce "passed" as "past", as in "Uncle George past last night. Ugh!
How would you pronounce "passed" such that it does not sound like "past"? I've never heard them pronounced differently.
This one has me scratching my head, too. I hear/say "past" and "passed" the same way. Same as "last," only the sound of the first letter is different, of course. Dicey, I think you're from the US, right? So am I, and I'm trying to think of a time when I've heard these words pronounced the way you mentioned. Maybe it's a very specific region?
Another one is yes-ti-day instead of yes-ter-day. Ugh, just sounds gross.
I would love you hear you say the two words to see if I could tell a difference. My tongue is incapable of following an "s" with a soft "d". I think you'd be sorely disappointed by the way the word "passed" is pronounced by the entire population of the Southeastern U.S.
Same here. I say "passed" and "past" the same way, as I thought everyone did, and can't hear a difference in those examples.
The OED gives the same exact pronunciation for both: /pæst/ (or /pɑːst/ for Brits).
I am with you on this one. !
This one is so interesting to me. I'm from a poor area of the rust belt and say PAST and PASSED the same as well. I also say PULL and POOL the same, regardless of having one friend who is incessantly trying to "help" me pronounce them differently. Hmmmm
Hmmm indeed. Regional accents are so variable. I also cannot hear a difference when I say "passed" and "past", but there is a definite difference between "pool" and "pull". "Pull" rhymes with "full", "pool" doesn't. "Pool "almost (but not quite) rhymes with "jewel".
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 20, 2019, 05:16:15 PM
Unfazed - not fazed
Unphased = out of phase
I keep seeing unphased when it is obvious from context that it should be unfazed.
Drives me nuts.
Also rein/reign.
I'm reading some fanfic and I keep getting distracted by the bad grammar and typos and things like unphased. It really makes me appreciate the editors of paid-for books.
Post by: Kris on March 20, 2019, 05:18:45 PM
Unfazed/unphased
Unfazed - not fazed
Unphased = out of phase
I keep seeing unphased when it is obvious from context that it should be unfazed.
Drives me nuts.
Also rein/reign.
I'm reading some fanfic and I keep getting distracted by the bad grammar and typos and things like unphased. It really makes me appreciate the editors of paid-for books.
I hate these, too.
And also, that almost no one seems to know the difference between tenet and tenant.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 20, 2019, 06:19:19 PM
Unfazed/unphased
Unfazed - not fazed
Unphased = out of phase
I keep seeing unphased when it is obvious from context that it should be unfazed.
Drives me nuts.
Also rein/reign.
I'm reading some fanfic and I keep getting distracted by the bad grammar and typos and things like unphased. It really makes me appreciate the editors of paid-for books.
I hate these, too.
And also, that almost no one seems to know the difference between tenet and tenant.
I don't see those mixed up too often. The one that bugs me in technical papers is quadrant/quadrat.
Post by: Kris on March 20, 2019, 06:32:28 PM
Unfazed/unphased
Unfazed - not fazed
Unphased = out of phase
I keep seeing unphased when it is obvious from context that it should be unfazed.
Drives me nuts.
Also rein/reign.
I'm reading some fanfic and I keep getting distracted by the bad grammar and typos and things like unphased. It really makes me appreciate the editors of paid-for books.
I hate these, too.
And also, that almost no one seems to know the difference between tenet and tenant.
I don't see those mixed up too often. The one that bugs me in technical papers is quadrant/quadrat.
Where I mostly see people use "tenant" instead of "tenet" is actually here on these forums.
Post by: calimom on March 20, 2019, 06:38:53 PM
Cali.Careful now. We have a prominent forum member who says Cali a lot.
Just, no.
I live in an uber-cool California city, and no one I know (from age 13 to 80), says "Cali."
Oh no! Shall I change my user name? I get it though, I would never use the word Cali in regular communication, written or otherwise. And please no on 'San Fran'.
And @Kris ditto on the tenet vs. tenants. When someone says 'tenants of Mustachianism' does that mean they rent property from..Pete? :p
Post by: Dicey on March 20, 2019, 11:09:35 PM
Hmmm, dunno. It's a fake screen name. We also have @Cali Nonya, but she's very busy in a remote corner of the world these days, so you may not have crossed paths with her. I guess I hate it more when it's spoken or stands alone, as in: "We're going to Cali in the morning". Ugh.Cali.Careful now. We have a prominent forum member who says Cali a lot.
Just, no.
I live in an uber-cool California city, and no one I know (from age 13 to 80), says "Cali."
Oh no! Shall I change my user name? I get it though, I would never use the word Cali in regular communication, written or otherwise. And please no on 'San Fran'.
And @Kris ditto on the tenet vs. tenants. When someone says 'tenants of Mustachianism' does that mean they rent property from..Pete? :p
And I agree with the tenant/tenet observation. I also giggle when people want to "pay down their principal".
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 21, 2019, 03:54:26 AM
And I agree with the tenant/tenet observation. I also giggle when people want to "pay down their principal".
Maybe it's a bribe so they don't get detention? ;-)
Post by: Loretta on March 21, 2019, 04:55:37 AM
The word smoothie also drives me crazy. One of my college English professors once railed on the -ie being added to words to baby-fy them, as I must agree. Undies, smoothies, gag.
Post by: frugalnacho on March 21, 2019, 10:40:53 AM
I guess I hate it more when it's spoken or stands alone, as in: "We're going to Cali in the morning". Ugh.
Do you hate biggie smalls? Specifically this song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2Qvuxxnqyg
Post by: Dicey on March 21, 2019, 12:58:34 PM
The word pantyhose, when I have to say it out loud, makes me cringe so I refer to them as nylons.OMG, never go to the Land Down Under. Brekky, sunnies, and mozzies are just the tip of the iceberg. Gawd, I love that place and hope to return for an extended stay one day.
The word smoothie also drives me crazy. One of my college English professors once railed on the -ie being added to words to baby-fy them, as I must agree. Undies, smoothies, gag.
Post by: Dicey on March 21, 2019, 01:01:59 PM
I wish I could say, "Who?", but, yeah, I know who he is, er was. RIP Biggie. I was pretty sure the "Cali" thing came from rap, but was it him specifically? I am so not clicking on that link - I don't need it sticking in my head today.I guess I hate it more when it's spoken or stands alone, as in: "We're going to Cali in the morning". Ugh.
Do you hate biggie smalls? Specifically this song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2Qvuxxnqyg
Post by: Freckles on March 21, 2019, 01:55:48 PM
Post by: frugalnacho on March 21, 2019, 03:13:40 PM
Post by: Dicey on March 21, 2019, 06:19:54 PM
A lot of rappers have love for california.Straight Outta Compton. Me too, actually.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on March 22, 2019, 04:01:11 AM
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on March 22, 2019, 12:18:25 PM
warn parts
bafoon
ablivian
senerio
^^^
Here are some misspellings I saw ~1 month ago.
bafoon
ablivian
senerio
^^^
Here are some misspellings I saw ~1 month ago.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 22, 2019, 12:28:58 PM
warn parts
bafoon
ablivian
senerio
^^^
Here are some misspellings I saw ~1 month ago.
Typos, are we worrying about typos as well? They are a dyme a dozzen, easy to find even in tytles here on the foruums. ;-) Plus the standard there/their issues.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on March 22, 2019, 12:33:02 PM
tenant/tenet .
I've not seen "tenet" written where "tenant" is correct.
About 6X I have seen "tenant" written where "tenet" is correct.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on March 22, 2019, 01:06:24 PM
I've not seen "tenet" written where "tenant" is correct.My impression is that everyone knows the word "tenant," but (relatively) few have ever seen "tenet."
About 6X I have seen "tenant" written where "tenet" is correct.
Post by: MDfive21 on March 25, 2019, 07:43:50 AM
I hate when people write or say "Based off of.." It's Based ON..
or "Based out of.." It's Based IN..
I don't hate it as much as the use of their/them as singular non-gendered pronouns but it's close.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 25, 2019, 09:54:05 AM
OK i got one. Haven't read the whole thread so don't shoot me if it's already in here.
I hate when people write or say "Based off of.." It's Based ON..
or "Based out of.." It's Based IN..
I don't hate it as much as the use of their/them as singular non-gendered pronouns but it's close.
I am actually starting to appreciate "they/them " when situations are ambiguous. It is not great, but the alternatives sound worse, or seem more awkward.
Post by: solon on March 25, 2019, 10:55:01 AM
I don't hate it as much as the use of their/them as singular non-gendered pronouns but it's close.
I'm with you. I mentioned this to arebelspy once, and they said I just needed to get used to it.
Post by: MDfive21 on March 25, 2019, 11:28:34 AM
having been a pretty good grammar student i generally get by on 'his or her' and 'he or she' or 'one', but i've started using 'that human' in informal contexts or just totally rephrasing so i don't put myself in a position to use a pronoun.
eta: ironically this post is probably full of grammatical errors.
Post by: calimom on March 25, 2019, 09:50:04 PM
I don't hate it as much as the use of their/them as singular non-gendered pronouns but it's close.
I'm with you. I mentioned this to arebelspy once, and they said I just needed to get used to it.
There's a lot of truth to what @arebelspy said. Everyone just evolve a tiny bit.
Post by: Dicey on March 25, 2019, 10:18:45 PM
I don't hate it as much as the use of their/them as singular non-gendered pronouns but it's close.
I'm with you. I mentioned this to arebelspy once, and they said I just needed to get used to it.
There's a lot of truth to what @arebelspy said. Everyone just evolve a tiny bit.
A friend's offspring goes only by their initials and non-specific gender pronouns. It was awkward at first, but it got easier.
Post by: arebelspy on March 25, 2019, 10:45:19 PM
I don't hate it as much as the use of their/them as singular non-gendered pronouns but it's close.
I'm with you. I mentioned this to arebelspy once, and they said I just needed to get used to it.
I identify as he/him, for what it's worth.
Post by: MDfive21 on March 26, 2019, 07:11:31 AM
I don't hate it as much as the use of their/them as singular non-gendered pronouns but it's close.
I'm with you. I mentioned this to arebelspy once, and they said I just needed to get used to it.
There's a lot of truth to what @arebelspy said. Everyone just evolve a tiny bit.
i fully support the evolution of language and the use of non-gender pronouns if that's what people want. no objection to that, but we need a new conjugation, not the appropriation of a conjugation that already has a well established meaning.
i use words like 'complexify' and other verbifications so i'd like to hear some new word for the pronouns. :)
Post by: arebelspy on March 26, 2019, 07:56:32 AM
I don't hate it as much as the use of their/them as singular non-gendered pronouns but it's close.
I'm with you. I mentioned this to arebelspy once, and they said I just needed to get used to it.
There's a lot of truth to what @arebelspy said. Everyone just evolve a tiny bit.
i fully support the evolution of language and the use of non-gender pronouns if that's what people want. no objection to that, but we need a new conjugation, not the appropriation of a conjugation that already has a well established meaning.
i use words like 'complexify' and other verbifications so i'd like to hear some new word for the pronouns. :)
We have these. Ze and zir, for example.
Post by: BlueHouse on March 26, 2019, 08:36:37 AM
I agree. They is right.I don't hate it as much as the use of their/them as singular non-gendered pronouns but it's close.
I'm with you. I mentioned this to arebelspy once, and they said I just needed to get used to it.
There's a lot of truth to what @arebelspy said. Everyone just evolve a tiny bit.
Post by: GreenSheep on March 28, 2019, 08:09:49 AM
"inhale in" (yoga instructor)
"revert back"
"repeat again"
Or, oddly enough, when they do the opposite:
"very sort of"
Well, is it "very" or is it "sort of"? It can't be both.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 28, 2019, 08:53:47 AM
It bugs me when people add a word because they don't understand that one of the words they're using already contains the meaning of the word they're adding, as in:
"inhale in" (yoga instructor)
"revert back"
"repeat again"
Or, oddly enough, when they do the opposite:
"very sort of"
Well, is it "very" or is it "sort of"? It can't be both.
I'm sure this is somewhere in this thread already, but "very unique" seems to fall in this general category too. If something is unique, there is nothing like it, so how can it be "very"? Very special, very unusual, sure, but very unique?
Post by: Kris on March 28, 2019, 09:05:28 AM
It bugs me when people add a word because they don't understand that one of the words they're using already contains the meaning of the word they're adding, as in:
"inhale in" (yoga instructor)
"revert back"
"repeat again"
Or, oddly enough, when they do the opposite:
"very sort of"
Well, is it "very" or is it "sort of"? It can't be both.
I'm sure this is somewhere in this thread already, but "very unique" seems to fall in this general category too. If something is unique, there is nothing like it, so how can it be "very"? Very special, very unusual, sure, but very unique?
On this point, one thing I particularly hate is that there are certain expressions like this that I've heard so often, it's very hard to eradicate them from my own vocabulary. Certainly, I never write "very unique." But when I'm speaking, the expression is so oft-heard that I find myself starting to say it, then stopping myself.
Same with "I could care less" and incorrect use of "hopefully." Hate all three of those expressions, and I wish there was some control panel I could access in my brain where I could switch them off permanently.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 28, 2019, 03:08:00 PM
Same with "I could care less" and incorrect use of "hopefully." Hate all three of those expressions, and I wish there was some control panel I could access in my brain where I could switch them off permanently.
The easy fix for finding yourself saying "I could care less" is to end it with a question mark, as in "I could care less?". The implication then is that no, you could not care less.
Post by: Freckles on March 29, 2019, 07:11:49 PM
It bugs me when people add a word because they don't understand that one of the words they're using already contains the meaning of the word they're adding, as in:
"inhale in" (yoga instructor)
"revert back"
"repeat again"
Or, oddly enough, when they do the opposite:
"very sort of"
Well, is it "very" or is it "sort of"? It can't be both.
In my profession we’re often asked to “share out.” Ugh.
Post by: Dicey on March 30, 2019, 01:04:05 AM
Ugh. That is a good reason to race to FIRE. Soon, no more "sharing out" for you!It bugs me when people add a word because they don't understand that one of the words they're using already contains the meaning of the word they're adding, as in:
"inhale in" (yoga instructor)
"revert back"
"repeat again"
Or, oddly enough, when they do the opposite:
"very sort of"
Well, is it "very" or is it "sort of"? It can't be both.
In my profession we’re often asked to “share out.” Ugh.
Post by: solon on April 03, 2019, 04:00:01 PM
Post by: Watchmaker on April 03, 2019, 04:16:27 PM
I don't hate it as much as the use of their/them as singular non-gendered pronouns but it's close.
I'm with you. I mentioned this to arebelspy once, and they said I just needed to get used to it.
There's a lot of truth to what @arebelspy said. Everyone just evolve a tiny bit.
i fully support the evolution of language and the use of non-gender pronouns if that's what people want. no objection to that, but we need a new conjugation, not the appropriation of a conjugation that already has a well established meaning.
But they has a long and illustrious history as a single pronoun. Chaucer used it. Shakespeare used it. And the King James Bible. And Jane Austen and Lewis Carroll and on and on.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on April 03, 2019, 04:23:54 PM
^
I read this a few days ago.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on April 03, 2019, 04:31:28 PM
It bugs me when people add a word because they don't understand that one of the words they're using already contains the meaning of the word they're adding, as in:
"inhale in" (yoga instructor)
"revert back"
"repeat again"
Or, oddly enough, when they do the opposite:
"very sort of"
Well, is it "very" or is it "sort of"? It can't be both.
I have said "up forward' and "back aft."
But only a few times.
Post by: Kris on April 03, 2019, 05:37:42 PM
UGH....
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 04, 2019, 09:41:20 AM
I frequently see people write that someone "eeks" out a living.
UGH....
Must be a lot of mice at that job.
Post by: BlueHouse on April 10, 2019, 10:43:29 AM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 10, 2019, 01:49:19 PM
I wish there were a way to see all my posts on just this topic. Because I have more I want to contribute, but I think I may have already said them. :(
Well, when you have lots of free time you could start at page 1 and just skim through looking for your name. ;-(
Post by: arebelspy on April 10, 2019, 02:24:18 PM
I wish there were a way to see all my posts on just this topic. Because I have more I want to contribute, but I think I may have already said them. :(
Use the print view: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/wordsphrases-i-wish-would-go-away/?action=printpage
And then hit control+f and search for "Post by: BlueHouse"
I see 22 of them.
10-20 seconds per post, I estimate it'll take you 5-10 minutes to read through them all.
Post by: Morning Glory on April 10, 2019, 04:06:39 PM
I was once asked if I had adopted my dog. It's not like I could have given birth to it, so....
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 10, 2019, 05:37:52 PM
People who say they "built" a house when they really mean they hired a builder and picked out a design. It's up there with saying you "rescued" a dog (George Carlin had a bit on that one.
I was once asked if I had adopted my dog. It's not like I could have given birth to it, so....
I had my tires changed. Yes, I had the tires on my car changed, I don't personally have tires. We all do that all the time, I suppose we assume others will understand what we mean. Shorthand, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
You might have bought your dog (from a reputable breeder, preferably) instead of adopting from a shelter.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on April 10, 2019, 06:03:47 PM
This morning I read this misspelling of "recommend."
Post by: marble_faun on May 06, 2019, 01:38:25 PM
"Loving on."
Example:
"Danny's having a rough time -- let's all just love on him and let his heart be filled with the Holy Spirit!"
I associate the phrase with religious people, especially in the South, but it appears in secular contexts, like "loving on your kids."
I don't like the phrase, because it calls to mind some sort of forced group hug in a church basement. You could just say "love," but the preposition "on" suggests physical contact (even if the speakers don't mean it that way). It just gives me an icky sensation whenever I hear it.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on May 06, 2019, 02:45:21 PM
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on May 06, 2019, 02:54:00 PM
I've got one!
"Loving on."
Example:
"Danny's having a rough time -- let's all just love on him and let his heart be filled with the Holy Spirit!"
I associate the phrase with religious people, especially in the South, but it appears in secular contexts, like "loving on your kids."
I don't like the phrase, because it calls to mind some sort of forced group hug in a church basement. You could just say "love," but the preposition "on" suggests physical contact (even if the speakers don't mean it that way). It just gives me an icky sensation whenever I hear it.
I think I've heard a song with the phrase "lovin' on you."
In any case I've always associated the phrase with physical affection between two people, kissing, hugging, caressing, etc.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on May 06, 2019, 08:31:28 PM
It was a giff. They said I didn't have to pay it back cuz it was a giff! ARG!
Post by: OtherJen on May 06, 2019, 10:19:51 PM
I've got one!
"Loving on."
Example:
"Danny's having a rough time -- let's all just love on him and let his heart be filled with the Holy Spirit!"
I associate the phrase with religious people, especially in the South, but it appears in secular contexts, like "loving on your kids."
I don't like the phrase, because it calls to mind some sort of forced group hug in a church basement. You could just say "love," but the preposition "on" suggests physical contact (even if the speakers don't mean it that way). It just gives me an icky sensation whenever I hear it.
Ugh, yes. I have the same reaction for the same reason.
Post by: ketchup on May 07, 2019, 08:33:51 AM
People who say they "built" a house when they really mean they hired a builder and picked out a design.This one drives me crazy. Even worse was when someone reasonably tech savvy says they "built" a computer when they selected specs online. Come on. Actually putting together a computer is not a big job (certainly compared to actually building a house), and has only gotten easier to the point where it's basically assembling Legos.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on May 07, 2019, 10:56:45 AM
I guess it is a phrase like any other.
Post by: ketchup on May 09, 2019, 09:47:51 AM
As far as building a house I can say we built our house. My Dad was the General Contractor. My husband did a lot of manual physical labor and helped with masonry work. We had to hire all the tradesmen, buy the materials. The house was started in June of 1975 and we moved in September of 1975. It seemed to take forever but was really fast and 99% finished when we moved in. The lawn was full of stones and was a ton of work. While building the house we lived it, breathed it, ate sawdust, we had tears, family arguments. We had worries over money, construction mortgage, buying the land...there was a ton of things. No, we didn't physically pound all the nails that hold the house together but we were there while the property was bulldozed, concrete foundation poured, sheet rock walls put in place, heating system installed, well drilled, septic system installed, tons of stuff. I was 22 and the Hub was 23 at the time. We saved the money on our own to get the property and then got a construction mortgage.A guy at work uses the phrase to mean mommy and daddy wrote a check to pay for whatever he picked out in a catalog, and then bought he and his wife an SUV because toddlers. There's a spectrum.
I guess it is a phrase like any other.
Post by: KBecks on May 09, 2019, 09:49:34 AM
Post by: ketchup on May 09, 2019, 12:33:26 PM
"butthurt" It's vulgar and uncreative.Damn. I guess I'm just vulgar and uncreative. Or butthurt. :)
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 10, 2019, 06:42:20 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=62&v=8Gv0H-vPoDc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=62&v=8Gv0H-vPoDc)
Post by: solon on May 10, 2019, 08:23:04 PM
Sent from my Android
Sent by someone too dumb to delete the default signature line
Post by: Dicey on May 10, 2019, 11:02:48 PM
Sent from my moto g(6) using TapatalkOh, hell yes!
Sent from my Android
Sent by someone too dumb to delete the default signature line
Post by: Bloop Bloop on May 11, 2019, 07:50:07 AM
I also get annoyed when someone uses a gender-neutral singular pronoun for someone whose gender is known. "The dumped player was told to pack their bags." Unless you're trying to hide the identity of the player for dramatic effect, it's his or her bags.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on May 11, 2019, 08:20:44 AM
I put to much sugar in my coffee.
This shirt is to tight.
My hamburger is to salty.
This movie is to violent.
Post by: Watchmaker on May 20, 2019, 01:59:57 PM
Loath/loathe, discrete/discreet, who/whom and me/myself are the ones that annoy me.
I also get annoyed when someone uses a gender-neutral singular pronoun for someone whose gender is known. "The dumped player was told to pack their bags." Unless you're trying to hide the identity of the player for dramatic effect, it's his or her bags.
I get annoyed by misguided complaints about the use of they as a singular pronoun. ;)
Post by: jinga nation on May 28, 2019, 06:02:12 AM
I hate it when people use to instead of too.
I put to much sugar in my coffee.
This shirt is to tight.
My hamburger is to salty.
This movie is to violent.
You gave to many examples too make your point. What are you trying too say? :-p
Post by: Wilson Hall on May 28, 2019, 11:13:24 AM
-Amazing
-Actually (which has turned into a verbal filler like "like" has)
-Brah, bruh, and all other variations
-Baked into (except when referring to a recipe)
-Jelly (for "jealous")
-AF
-Onboarding (and all other corporate jargon, for that matter)
"Impacted" is overused these days. What is wrong with the word "affected?" "Impacted" sounds like something that happens to one's bowels.
Recently, I've heard "welcome in" when entering a store or restaurant. What does this mean? Why not simply say, "Welcome to..."?
Post by: GuitarStv on May 28, 2019, 11:33:49 AM
I hate it when people use to instead of too.
I put to much sugar in my coffee.
This shirt is to tight.
My hamburger is to salty.
This movie is to violent.
You gave to many examples too make your point. What are you trying too say? :-p
Those are to great points!
Post by: Roadrunner53 on May 28, 2019, 11:35:05 AM
I hate it when people use to instead of too.
I put to much sugar in my coffee.
This shirt is to tight.
My hamburger is to salty.
This movie is to violent.
You gave to many examples too make your point. What are you trying too say? :-p
Two people are too many to open the door.
Too plus Too equals fore.
Let's go too the movies.
I have to many apples.
Post by: Nick_Miller on May 30, 2019, 07:13:45 AM
anything to do with "tea"
"pivoting" (corporatespeak)
when someone does the clapping hands emoiji between every single words in a phrase or sentence
Post by: Dicey on May 30, 2019, 07:22:08 AM
You guys are two much.Two people are too many to open the door.I hate it when people use to instead of too.You gave to many examples too make your point. What are you trying too say? :-p
I put to much sugar in my coffee.
This shirt is to tight.
My hamburger is to salty.
This movie is to violent.
Too plus Too equals fore.
Let's go too the movies.
I have to many apples.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on May 30, 2019, 07:34:14 AM
Post by: shelivesthedream on May 30, 2019, 11:16:36 AM
anything to do with "tea"
What's wrong with tea? Am I missing something? It's a delicious hot beverage.
Post by: iris lily on May 30, 2019, 11:26:15 AM
I've got one!
"Loving on”...
I don't like the phrase, because it calls to mind some sort of forced group hug in a church basement..... It just gives me an icky sensation whenever I hear it.
YES to all of this.
Post by: iris lily on May 30, 2019, 11:29:28 AM
anything to do with "tea"
What's wrong with tea? Am I missing something? It's a delicious hot beverage.
I have lately noticed “tea” being used in new ways as in Spill the tea (share the gossip.) APPARENTLY this originates in drag queen culture where T stands for Truth, so “tell the Truth/tell the T/ Tell the Tea morphed to spill the Tea.
Post by: marble_faun on May 30, 2019, 01:10:42 PM
anything to do with "tea"
What's wrong with tea? Am I missing something? It's a delicious hot beverage.
I have lately noticed “tea” being used in new ways as in Spill the tea (share the gossip.) APPARENTLY this originates in drag queen culture where T stands for Truth, so “tell the Truth/tell the T/ Tell the Tea morphed to spill the Tea.
Yes! I first noticed this slang on YouTube (which I keep half an eye on for anthropological reasons). Among a certain set of YouTubers, there's all kinds of drama and character assassinations always going on, and everyone is scrambling to get the "tea."
I actually like this slang though and have started using it in real life. :-)
Post by: iris lily on May 31, 2019, 12:29:27 PM
It is “loving on” that grates.
Post by: EricL on June 05, 2019, 11:12:32 AM
The term was originally coined just referring to capitalism after 1902 with modified definitions every since. But capitalism doesn’t have morality stages where one version was somehow superior to the other. You can still hate capitalism if you want and say it was always evil. There’s seriously good arguments for that point of view. But the term states a position as fully argued that isn’t; it implies academic backing when the academic definition is more nuanced.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on June 05, 2019, 11:42:35 AM
"custum" "breaded"
^
The same person misspelled "custom" and "braided."
Post by: BlueHouse on June 10, 2019, 01:56:22 PM
Genius! Thanks!I wish there were a way to see all my posts on just this topic. Because I have more I want to contribute, but I think I may have already said them. :(
Use the print view: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/wordsphrases-i-wish-would-go-away/?action=printpage
And then hit control+f and search for "Post by: BlueHouse"
I see 22 of them.
10-20 seconds per post, I estimate it'll take you 5-10 minutes to read through them all.
Post by: BlueHouse on June 10, 2019, 02:02:54 PM
People who say they "built" a house when they really mean they hired a builder and picked out a design. It's up there with saying you "rescued" a dog (George Carlin had a bit on that one.I felt the same way about rescues, until I adopted my dog through a rescue org. They literally saved this dog from euthanasia, and explained to me that because I was taking the dog directly off transport, it opened up another foster care spot for another dog. So yeah, I do say he's a rescue dog now.
Post by: ketchup on June 10, 2019, 02:15:55 PM
I have a coworker that bought his dog from one of those awful puppy-mill pet stores. He likes to say he "rescued" him from the awful pet store.People who say they "built" a house when they really mean they hired a builder and picked out a design. It's up there with saying you "rescued" a dog (George Carlin had a bit on that one.I felt the same way about rescues, until I adopted my dog through a rescue org. They literally saved this dog from euthanasia, and explained to me that because I was taking the dog directly off transport, it opened up another foster care spot for another dog. So yeah, I do say he's a rescue dog now.
No. No, no, no.
Post by: iris lily on June 11, 2019, 07:42:25 AM
I have a coworker that bought his dog from one of those awful puppy-mill pet stores. He likes to say he "rescued" him from the awful pet store.People who say they "built" a house when they really mean they hired a builder and picked out a design. It's up there with saying you "rescued" a dog (George Carlin had a bit on that one.I felt the same way about rescues, until I adopted my dog through a rescue org. They literally saved this dog from euthanasia, and explained to me that because I was taking the dog directly off transport, it opened up another foster care spot for another dog. So yeah, I do say he's a rescue dog now.
No. No, no, no.
This the problem with popularizing “rescue” as a virtuous act. My friend said she “rescued”a puppy from a breeder.
Um no honey, you bought a dog. Own it. It ain’t against the law.
Any Tom, Dick, or Harry can set themselves up as a rescue organization. We had to kick an elderly couple out of the national breed rescue organization for stockpiling dogs and selling them. It was mos def a money making operation for them.
Back to friends who rescue dogs: that same friend who “rescued” the dog from a breeder, bought one of those mixed breed dogs. Ummm, ok, whatever lady. But when she floated the idea of breeding it I said straight up in front of her and her husband at a dinner party —sure she can do that it is not against the law—but I would shun her. Yes I would be shunning her if she bred that dog. We all laughed uncomfortably about that and she Blathered about how she had bred excellent dogs blah blah blah blah but it was all a lot of bullshit. They knew I was serious, and shunning is my only tool.
Yet my other friend on the other side of the scale will practically start crying when she thinks about herself and her virtuosity in rescuing a house full of dogs she has. These really are street dogs. For a while she was an animal collector and she had way too many dogs and cats in her house.
Crying about shit always annoys me unless it’s very serious stuff like someone dies.
Post by: ketchup on June 11, 2019, 08:59:01 AM
Back to friends who rescue dogs: that same friend who “rescued” the dog from a breeder, bought one of those mixed breed dogs. Ummm, ok, whatever lady. But when she floated the idea of breeding it I said straight up in front of her and her husband at a dinner party —sure she can do that it is not against the law—but I would shun her. Yes I would be shunning her if she bred that dog. We all laughed uncomfortably about that and she Blathered about how she had bred excellent dogs blah blah blah blah but it was all a lot of bullshit. They knew I was serious, and shunning is my only tool.Yeesh. Talking about "breeding" a designer dog. That's so much worse than even breeding for the purpose of making designer dogs. Related: https://www.grca.org/find-a-golden/more-topics-before-you-buy/goldendoodles/
Post by: GuitarStv on June 11, 2019, 09:17:23 AM
Crying about shit always annoys me unless it’s very serious stuff like someone dies.
Yeah. Fuck those assholes with their feelings. :P
Post by: iris lily on June 11, 2019, 10:05:25 AM
Crying about shit always annoys me unless it’s very serious stuff like someone dies.
Yeah. Fuck those assholes with their feelings. :P
Yes, some people cry easily, there is a big physiological component to it. Doesn't necessarily mean you (the generic you) are a special kind of feeling human because you cry.
In my household DH tears up over non emergency stuff, and I dont. This difference is largely due to our physical makeup. Menopause showed that to be true for me. Haha. Glad I am over that!
Post by: iris lily on June 11, 2019, 10:13:43 AM
Back to friends who rescue dogs: that same friend who “rescued” the dog from a breeder, bought one of those mixed breed dogs. Ummm, ok, whatever lady. But when she floated the idea of breeding it I said straight up in front of her and her husband at a dinner party —sure she can do that it is not against the law—but I would shun her. Yes I would be shunning her if she bred that dog. We all laughed uncomfortably about that and she Blathered about how she had bred excellent dogs blah blah blah blah but it was all a lot of bullshit. They knew I was serious, and shunning is my only tool.Yeesh. Talking about "breeding" a designer dog. That's so much worse than even breeding for the purpose of making designer dogs. Related: https://www.grca.org/find-a-golden/more-topics-before-you-buy/goldendoodles/
Yeah, it was a gold doodle. Fairly Brainless. But very cute!
OTOH she and her husband are super good dog parents. They ended up with two Doodles, there was fighting (no kidding, two bitches!) and they carried out appropriate training activities for the girls. I was always i presed when
I would visit the Doodle household and the girls would be told to “go to your corner” and they did!
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 11, 2019, 11:46:45 AM
Back to friends who rescue dogs: that same friend who “rescued” the dog from a breeder, bought one of those mixed breed dogs. Ummm, ok, whatever lady. But when she floated the idea of breeding it I said straight up in front of her and her husband at a dinner party —sure she can do that it is not against the law—but I would shun her. Yes I would be shunning her if she bred that dog. We all laughed uncomfortably about that and she Blathered about how she had bred excellent dogs blah blah blah blah but it was all a lot of bullshit. They knew I was serious, and shunning is my only tool.Yeesh. Talking about "breeding" a designer dog. That's so much worse than even breeding for the purpose of making designer dogs. Related: https://www.grca.org/find-a-golden/more-topics-before-you-buy/goldendoodles/
Yeah, it was a gold doodle. Fairly Brainless. But very cute!
I have never been around a golden doodle but I would think they would be very smart and relaxed dogs. I have had 4 poodles in my lifetime and they are beyond smart. To the point they exasperate you with their intelligent nature. When they insist on something they will not give it up! The word NO doesn't exist when they have something in their heads. Years ago we had a poodle when I was a teen. That dog would kick a dog biscuit under the fridge. It could have been weeks before she had done it. Well, she would smell it one day and insist she had to have it. She would bark her head off. No coaxing would make her stop. My Dad who was pretty low on patience would have to drag the fridge out and it was a heavy beast so the dog could get the tid bit that was under there. These dogs have so much energy and get 'bored'. That is where cross breeding would seem ideal. Seems you would get an intelligent, toned down, relaxed dog.
OTOH she and her husband are super good dog parents. They ended up with two Doodles, there was fighting (no kidding, two bitches!) and they carried out appropriate training activities for the girls. I was always i presed when
I would visit the Doodle household and the girls would be told to “go to your corner” and they did!
Post by: iris lily on June 11, 2019, 01:49:33 PM
Back to friends who rescue dogs: that same friend who “rescued” the dog from a breeder, bought one of those mixed breed dogs. Ummm, ok, whatever lady. But when she floated the idea of breeding it I said straight up in front of her and her husband at a dinner party —sure she can do that it is not against the law—but I would shun her. Yes I would be shunning her if she bred that dog. We all laughed uncomfortably about that and she Blathered about how she had bred excellent dogs blah blah blah blah but it was all a lot of bullshit. They knew I was serious, and shunning is my only tool.Yeesh. Talking about "breeding" a designer dog. That's so much worse than even breeding for the purpose of making designer dogs. Related: https://www.grca.org/find-a-golden/more-topics-before-you-buy/goldendoodles/
Yeah, it was a gold doodle. Fairly Brainless. But very cute!
I have never been around a golden doodle but I would think they would be very smart and relaxed dogs. I have had 4 poodles in my lifetime and they are beyond smart. To the point they exasperate you with their intelligent nature. When they insist on something they will not give it up! The word NO doesn't exist when they have something in their heads. Years ago we had a poodle when I was a teen. That dog would kick a dog biscuit under the fridge. It could have been weeks before she had done it. Well, she would smell it one day and insist she had to have it. She would bark her head off. No coaxing would make her stop. My Dad who was pretty low on patience would have to drag the fridge out and it was a heavy beast so the dog could get the tid bit that was under there. These dogs have so much energy and get 'bored'. That is where cross breeding would seem ideal. Seems you would get an intelligent, toned down, relaxed dog.
OTOH she and her husband are super good dog parents. They ended up with two Doodles, there was fighting (no kidding, two bitches!) and they carried out appropriate training activities for the girls. I was always i presed when
I would visit the Doodle household and the girls would be told to “go to your corner” and they did!
Probably I am just being breedist.
I have tons of respect for standard poodles and their brainpower. Not so much for goldens. anyone who has a good line of standard poodles wouldn’t be mixing with that anyway. So it’s only money focused mills and backyard breeders who are producing these doodle dogs.
Post by: iris lily on June 13, 2019, 11:37:35 AM
What word am I supposed to use?
I have adopted many cats and dogs over my lifetime. I have 0 human children. Believe me, I know the difference between taking in a human child and a dog, that is why I dont have children either from my loins or adopted.
I doubt I will stop using the word “adopt” because it is a pretty good word for this concept and I do not know one that is better. Should I “get” a dog? “Take in” a dog?
Post by: Dicey on June 13, 2019, 12:14:21 PM
I was reminded today that some people are offended by those of us who used the word “adopt” as in “today I adopted a dog.”I suppose adopting new habits are off the table too? I'm with you, iris lily. Not going to fret about that one.
What word am I supposed to use?
I have adopted many cats and dogs over my lifetime. I have 0 human children. Believe me, I know the difference between taking in a human child and a dog, that is why I dont have children either from my loins or adopted.
I doubt I will stop using the word “adopt” because it is a pretty good word for this concept and I do not know one that is better. Should I “get” a dog? “Take in” a dog?
Post by: zolotiyeruki on June 13, 2019, 12:30:20 PM
I was reminded today that some people are offended by those of us who used the word “adopt” as in “today I adopted a dog.”Just so I understand better, people object to the word "adopt" being applied to anything other than a child? (At first, in my mind, I thought your post might be in the context of "rescuing" pets upthread)
What word am I supposed to use?
I have adopted many cats and dogs over my lifetime. I have 0 human children. Believe me, I know the difference between taking in a human child and a dog, that is why I dont have children either from my loins or adopted.
I doubt I will stop using the word “adopt” because it is a pretty good word for this concept and I do not know one that is better. Should I “get” a dog? “Take in” a dog?
Post by: iris lily on June 13, 2019, 01:21:27 PM
Yes they do. I have been corrected more than once about using that word ”adopt” about a dog.I was reminded today that some people are offended by those of us who used the word “adopt” as in “today I adopted a dog.”Just so I understand better, people object to the word "adopt" being applied to anything other than a child? (At first, in my mind, I thought your post might be in the context of "rescuing" pets upthread)
What word am I supposed to use?
I have adopted many cats and dogs over my lifetime. I have 0 human children. Believe me, I know the difference between taking in a human child and a dog, that is why I dont have children either from my loins or adopted.
I doubt I will stop using the word “adopt” because it is a pretty good word for this concept and I do not know one that is better. Should I “get” a dog? “Take in” a dog?
Google it. it’s a thing in the adoption community.
Here’s the first instance in my Google search:
https://adoption.com/forums/thread/383035/the-term-quot-adoption-quot-for-pets/
Post by: Kris on June 13, 2019, 01:28:38 PM
Yes they do. I have been corrected more than once about using that word ”adopt” about a dog.I was reminded today that some people are offended by those of us who used the word “adopt” as in “today I adopted a dog.”Just so I understand better, people object to the word "adopt" being applied to anything other than a child? (At first, in my mind, I thought your post might be in the context of "rescuing" pets upthread)
What word am I supposed to use?
I have adopted many cats and dogs over my lifetime. I have 0 human children. Believe me, I know the difference between taking in a human child and a dog, that is why I dont have children either from my loins or adopted.
I doubt I will stop using the word “adopt” because it is a pretty good word for this concept and I do not know one that is better. Should I “get” a dog? “Take in” a dog?
Google it. it’s a thing in the adoption community.
Wow. I have to say, this one feels really over the top.
Post by: iris lily on June 13, 2019, 03:48:12 PM
But now that you know it offends someone, or a group of someones, , will you stop using it?Yes they do. I have been corrected more than once about using that word ”adopt” about a dog.I was reminded today that some people are offended by those of us who used the word “adopt” as in “today I adopted a dog.”Just so I understand better, people object to the word "adopt" being applied to anything other than a child? (At first, in my mind, I thought your post might be in the context of "rescuing" pets upthread)
What word am I supposed to use?
I have adopted many cats and dogs over my lifetime. I have 0 human children. Believe me, I know the difference between taking in a human child and a dog, that is why I dont have children either from my loins or adopted.
I doubt I will stop using the word “adopt” because it is a pretty good word for this concept and I do not know one that is better. Should I “get” a dog? “Take in” a dog?
Google it. it’s a thing in the adoption community.
Wow. I have to say, this one feels really over the top.
Post by: Paul der Krake on June 13, 2019, 04:04:38 PM
Post by: Kris on June 13, 2019, 07:44:05 PM
But now that you know it offends someone, or a group of someones, , will you stop using it?Yes they do. I have been corrected more than once about using that word ”adopt” about a dog.I was reminded today that some people are offended by those of us who used the word “adopt” as in “today I adopted a dog.”Just so I understand better, people object to the word "adopt" being applied to anything other than a child? (At first, in my mind, I thought your post might be in the context of "rescuing" pets upthread)
What word am I supposed to use?
I have adopted many cats and dogs over my lifetime. I have 0 human children. Believe me, I know the difference between taking in a human child and a dog, that is why I dont have children either from my loins or adopted.
I doubt I will stop using the word “adopt” because it is a pretty good word for this concept and I do not know one that is better. Should I “get” a dog? “Take in” a dog?
Google it. it’s a thing in the adoption community.
Wow. I have to say, this one feels really over the top.
I literally have no idea what else to say.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 14, 2019, 05:58:17 AM
I, for one, will continue to use adopt a dog when referring to acquiring a dog from an animal welfare organization, dog pound or private owner who can no longer keep their dog.
It is a word that can be used in many different ways.
This is a non issue.
Post by: Cool Friend on June 14, 2019, 08:49:58 AM
Just say "a dog appeared in my home" instead
Post by: iris lily on June 14, 2019, 08:57:48 AM
but you're diminishing what brave, generous heroes they are for adopting children :(
Just say "a dog appeared in my home" instead
Yes, it’s ridiculous.
I have limited capacity to be schooled to avoid the word of the day that causes the hurt feelings of the day.
Post by: Dicey on June 14, 2019, 10:32:37 AM
You mean the way some people think "Blind Curve" is offensive to the visually impaired and "Dead End" is offensive to the non-living? Seriously, my city has its own sign shop and no longer uses these terms.but you're diminishing what brave, generous heroes they are for adopting children :(
Just say "a dog appeared in my home" instead
Yes, it’s ridiculous.
I have limited capacity to be schooled to avoid the word of the day that causes the hurt feelings of the day.
Post by: frugalnacho on June 14, 2019, 11:03:00 AM
Crying about shit always annoys me unless it’s very serious stuff like someone dies.
Yeah. Fuck those assholes with their feelings. :P
(https://preview.redd.it/l049h21m6cry.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=f8bc11edbc1e2c0f73fa0fb430dd25731ed18512)
Post by: iris lily on June 14, 2019, 11:16:05 AM
Post by: iris lily on June 14, 2019, 11:22:49 AM
You mean the way some people think "Blind Curve" is offensive to the visually impaired and "Dead End" is offensive to the non-living? Seriously, my city has its own sign shop and no longer uses these terms.but you're diminishing what brave, generous heroes they are for adopting children :(
Just say "a dog appeared in my home" instead
Yes, it’s ridiculous.
I have limited capacity to be schooled to avoid the word of the day that causes the hurt feelings of the day.
You arent kidding here? What do they use in place of Dead End?
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 14, 2019, 11:45:13 AM
No way out?
No through road.
Post by: Kris on June 14, 2019, 11:52:26 AM
That is just dumb to say the word adopt shouldn't be used in adopting a dog. The word adopt can be used in many ways. Adopt a highway (sponsor), adopt a new policy, adopt a new approach, adopt a new country.
I, for one, will continue to use adopt a dog when referring to acquiring a dog from an animal welfare organization, dog pound or private owner who can no longer keep their dog.
It is a word that can be used in many different ways.
This is a non issue.
I agree. Especially because I cannot for the life of me see how using "adopt" in one of these other senses harms adopted children or their adopting parents in any way.
Post by: Dicey on June 14, 2019, 12:29:01 PM
"You arent kidding here? What do they use in place of Dead End?"No Exit, or Not A Through Road/Street typically, but they have some other silly euphemism that I don't remember just now. Really not kidding, sigh. I wish I was.
No way out?
No through road.
Post by: robartsd on June 14, 2019, 12:37:13 PM
24/7/365 emphasizes that they're open every day without taking holidays - many 24/7 places don't take holidays but some places do close for a few holidays each year.24/7/36524 hours in one day, every day
It's redundant!
7 days in a week, every week
365 days in a year, most years
I don't quite get how that's redundant, exactly. Repetitive, certainly. Cumulative too, but redundant? I don't know...
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 14, 2019, 01:06:40 PM
That is just dumb to say the word adopt shouldn't be used in adopting a dog. The word adopt can be used in many ways. Adopt a highway (sponsor), adopt a new policy, adopt a new approach, adopt a new country.
I, for one, will continue to use adopt a dog when referring to acquiring a dog from an animal welfare organization, dog pound or private owner who can no longer keep their dog.
It is a word that can be used in many different ways.
This is a non issue.
I agree. Especially because I cannot for the life of me see how using "adopt" in one of these other senses harms adopted children or their adopting parents in any way.
Agreed Kris. People who dwell on this word should get a hobby. Every single animal welfare organization uses this word when they are trying to get the word out that there are many homeless dogs that could use a good home and will help arrange adoptions for these animals. People, get a grip adoption is just a word. Maybe change the adoption word for aquiring a baby. Embrace a baby into the household. Embracement process.
Post by: robartsd on June 14, 2019, 03:58:37 PM
"No Outlet""You arent kidding here? What do they use in place of Dead End?"No Exit, or Not A Through Road/Street typically, but they have some other silly euphemism that I don't remember just now. Really not kidding, sigh. I wish I was.
No way out?
No through road.
Post by: Dicey on June 14, 2019, 05:33:20 PM
That's it! It always makes me laugh. Like it's saying there is no place to buy cheap stuff on that street."No Outlet""You arent kidding here? What do they use in place of Dead End?"No Exit, or Not A Through Road/Street typically, but they have some other silly euphemism that I don't remember just now. Really not kidding, sigh. I wish I was.
No way out?
No through road.
Post by: Travis on June 14, 2019, 06:19:59 PM
Post by: iris lily on June 15, 2019, 10:26:06 AM
...I cannot for the life of me see how using "adopt" in one of these other senses harms adopted children or their adopting parents in any way....
It harms them because it makes them feel the equivalent of a dog. Feelings matter. Reference the many posts on other recent and similar threads.
As it happens, I agree with you. But if somebody in your face or, as happened to me, tells you that the word “adopt” in conjunction with a dog adoption is not cool with her and the adoption community, what would you do?
Post by: arebelspy on June 15, 2019, 10:44:48 AM
...I cannot for the life of me see how using "adopt" in one of these other senses harms adopted children or their adopting parents in any way....
It harms them because it makes them feel the equivalent of a dog. Feelings matter. Reference the many posts on other recent and similar threads.
As it happens, I agree with you. But if somebody in your face or, as happened to me, tells you that the word “adopt” in conjunction with a dog adoption is not cool with her and the adoption community, what would you do?
I know you weren't asking me, but personally, as a rule with something like that: I would ask them for alternative phrases, and try to remember not to use it around them.
Whether I stopped using it generally or not would depend on how widespread that offense was, and/or how much harm it did.
See, for example, using the word "retarded" as an insult/to describe something you don't like. Very offensive to many, and harmful. I don't use it. "Adoption" is not, in my opinion and experience, at that level--this thread was the first I'd heard of it--but if it got there, I'd stop using it except for human adoption.
Even if it wasn't to that level, I'd still try not to use it around the person that was offended by it, if they gave me reasonable alternatives. What benefit do I gain by hurting them? What harm does it cause me using a different word or phrase that they don't find offensive?
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 15, 2019, 12:39:17 PM
...I cannot for the life of me see how using "adopt" in one of these other senses harms adopted children or their adopting parents in any way....
It harms them because it makes them feel the equivalent of a dog. Feelings matter. Reference the many posts on other recent and similar threads.
As it happens, I agree with you. But if somebody in your face or, as happened to me, tells you that the word “adopt” in conjunction with a dog adoption is not cool with her and the adoption community, what would you do?
Adoption is a word. No one is comparing adopting a kid to adopting a dog. It is the legal process of acquiring a new family member and most people think of their dogs as family. Adopting a child or an animal requires a lot of paperwork and investigation into placing the child or animal into the right household. So the process is similar. https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/criminal/animal-law/what-you-need-to-know-when-adopting-a-pet.html Not all children or animals are the right fit and these agencies delve into the application to determine needs of the family unit.
Post by: Uturn on June 18, 2019, 06:00:38 AM
...I cannot for the life of me see how using "adopt" in one of these other senses harms adopted children or their adopting parents in any way....
It harms them because it makes them feel the equivalent of a dog.
As an adopted child, I find absolutely no objection to using the word adopt when talking about a pet. Not only that, I find it silly that some do. As far as being equated to a dog, have you seen how people treat their dogs nowadays? In my pre-adopted days, I would have loved to be treated like today's dog.
Post by: Watchmaker on June 18, 2019, 02:28:40 PM
Yes they do. I have been corrected more than once about using that word ”adopt” about a dog.I was reminded today that some people are offended by those of us who used the word “adopt” as in “today I adopted a dog.”Just so I understand better, people object to the word "adopt" being applied to anything other than a child? (At first, in my mind, I thought your post might be in the context of "rescuing" pets upthread)
What word am I supposed to use?
I have adopted many cats and dogs over my lifetime. I have 0 human children. Believe me, I know the difference between taking in a human child and a dog, that is why I dont have children either from my loins or adopted.
I doubt I will stop using the word “adopt” because it is a pretty good word for this concept and I do not know one that is better. Should I “get” a dog? “Take in” a dog?
Google it. it’s a thing in the adoption community.
Here’s the first instance in my Google search:
https://adoption.com/forums/thread/383035/the-term-quot-adoption-quot-for-pets/
Maybe there are other places where people have criticized the use of adoption more voraciously, but when I read the comments at that link, it just came across as reasonable people discussing their feelings about words within their own community.
"somehow when I see the term used in this type of manner it's a little cringeworthy. Maybe I need to just lighten up, and just go out and get a rhinestone studded pink collar for myself."
"If it bothers you then gently let those you know to try to use another term. I have no issue with it at all and have adopted many new buddies over the years - I don't care to call them pets - that bothers me - so each to their own (I'm adopted as well)."
"On the other hand, adoption means to take as ones own. Therefore, we adopt both pets and positions on issues.
I have heard this before but I think it is too much of an attempt to control others to say do not use a perfectly legitimate word, because it has a synonym that I'm sensitive about."
""Adopt" a pet has never bothered me."
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 18, 2019, 03:40:38 PM
I feed my dog. I feed my kids.
I play ball with my dog. I play games with my kids.
I take my dog for a walk around the neighborhood. I take my kids for a walk around the block.
My dog is smart. My kid is smart.
I taught my dog to be obedient. I taught my kid good manners.
These are all words, so we should not use feed, play, take, smart, taught either because you can use them to describle what you do with kids?
Adopt is just a word. It is a good word. Most adoptions, whether it is a kid or a dog, are a great experience and people open their hearts to adopted beings.
Post by: ysette9 on June 18, 2019, 06:31:14 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 18, 2019, 07:58:10 PM
I find “adopt” to make sense for a pet, but simultaneously find it odd. For humans adoption is usually presented as an alternative way of starting a family that contrasts with creating offspring that share your genetic material. So in that sense adopting a dog makes sense as you don’t share genetic material, but it raises the question of “adopting versus....”? And that is where my brain stalls.
"adopting versus...?" . . . . buying.
I would adopt a pet from a rescue organization but buy it from a breeder. The choice of words describes the difference in the way the pet was acquired.
Post by: iris lily on June 18, 2019, 08:07:44 PM
I find “adopt” to make sense for a pet, but simultaneously find it odd. For humans adoption is usually presented as an alternative way of starting a family that contrasts with creating offspring that share your genetic material. So in that sense adopting a dog makes sense as you don’t share genetic material, but it raises the question of “adopting versus....”? And that is where my brain stalls.
"adopting versus...?" . . . . buying.
I would adopt a pet from a rescue organization but buy it from a breeder. The choice of words describes the difference in the way the pet was acquired.
No, I would use the word “ adopt “ for buying a dog from a breeder. But I really think I just use the word “get “. as in “we are getting a dog” or “we got a dog” Or “we got another dog.”
Post by: Morning Glory on June 19, 2019, 02:42:34 AM
I find “adopt” to make sense for a pet, but simultaneously find it odd. For humans adoption is usually presented as an alternative way of starting a family that contrasts with creating offspring that share your genetic material. So in that sense adopting a dog makes sense as you don’t share genetic material, but it raises the question of “adopting versus....”? And that is where my brain stalls.
Me too. I'm fine with "adopted" but in some contexts it's a bit weird: "did you adopt the dog?" ""Well, I didn't give birth to it so....."
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 19, 2019, 06:06:14 AM
I find “adopt” to make sense for a pet, but simultaneously find it odd. For humans adoption is usually presented as an alternative way of starting a family that contrasts with creating offspring that share your genetic material. So in that sense adopting a dog makes sense as you don’t share genetic material, but it raises the question of “adopting versus....”? And that is where my brain stalls.
"adopting versus...?" . . . . buying.
I would adopt a pet from a rescue organization but buy it from a breeder. The choice of words describes the difference in the way the pet was acquired.
No, I would use the word “ adopt “ for buying a dog from a breeder. But I really think I just use the word “get “. as in “we are getting a dog” or “we got a dog” Or “we got another dog.”
[/quote
Personally I would also most likely just use "get". But I was trying to think of the circumstances where "adopt" would and would not be the appropriate verb for acquiring a pet.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 19, 2019, 08:16:14 AM
Post by: ketchup on June 19, 2019, 11:28:33 AM
Actually, I'm not offended at all; I just find it funny. And it lets me feel smugly superior, which is really what life is all about.
Post by: marble_faun on June 19, 2019, 11:40:14 AM
There are tons of dogs in shelters that need homes. If they aren't adopted, a lot of them will be euthanized. You do pay a small fee to the shelter to adopt, but this is not referred to as "buying."
There are also breeders and puppy mills who are producing new dogs to sell, as a for-profit enterprise, sometimes for $2,000+. Getting a dog from this type of source is referred to as buying.
Technically I suppose buying a dog could be considered "adopting" it in some sense, but people in this world draw a strong line between the two ways of getting dogs. (A friend of mine was very active in animal rescue work and had a slogan: "Don't breed or buy while shelter pets die.")
Post by: Tyson on June 19, 2019, 11:58:01 AM
In dog-owner circles, there is a big differentiation in meaning between "buying" and "adopting." For some it has become a moral/political issue.
There are tons of dogs in shelters that need homes. If they aren't adopted, a lot of them will be euthanized. You do pay a small fee to the shelter to adopt, but this is not referred to as "buying."
There are also breeders and puppy mills who are producing new dogs to sell, as a for-profit enterprise, sometimes for $2,000+. Getting a dog from this type of source is referred to as buying.
Technically I suppose buying a dog could be considered "adopting" it in some sense, but people in this world draw a strong line between the two ways of getting dogs. (A friend of mine was very active in animal rescue work and had a slogan: "Don't breed or buy while shelter pets die.")
My parents paid $10k to adopt me back in 1972. I'm sure it profited the birth mom. Does that mean I should tell people I was bought?
Post by: ketchup on June 19, 2019, 12:55:17 PM
In dog-owner circles, there is a big differentiation in meaning between "buying" and "adopting." For some it has become a moral/political issue.Reaaaly don't want to drag this thread off topic but responsible breeders that give a shit are not making money, or at least that's not their goal. Breeding dogs is not cheap when done right. We lost money on our last litter, and came out ahead on the previous one (if you only count costs directly related to the litter). I hand-waved the numbers and that time we made almost $1/hr. And it's a ton of work and derails your life. It's a really bad way to make money.
There are tons of dogs in shelters that need homes. If they aren't adopted, a lot of them will be euthanized. You do pay a small fee to the shelter to adopt, but this is not referred to as "buying."
There are also breeders and puppy mills who are producing new dogs to sell, as a for-profit enterprise, sometimes for $2,000+. Getting a dog from this type of source is referred to as buying.
Technically I suppose buying a dog could be considered "adopting" it in some sense, but people in this world draw a strong line between the two ways of getting dogs. (A friend of mine was very active in animal rescue work and had a slogan: "Don't breed or buy while shelter pets die.")
There are plenty of backyard breeders making money cutting corners or "breeding" designer dogs, and they should be condemned, but not every breeder is a piece of shit and not every breeder is doing it for the cash.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 19, 2019, 01:05:07 PM
In dog-owner circles, there is a big differentiation in meaning between "buying" and "adopting." For some it has become a moral/political issue.
There are tons of dogs in shelters that need homes. If they aren't adopted, a lot of them will be euthanized. You do pay a small fee to the shelter to adopt, but this is not referred to as "buying."
There are also breeders and puppy mills who are producing new dogs to sell, as a for-profit enterprise, sometimes for $2,000+. Getting a dog from this type of source is referred to as buying.
Technically I suppose buying a dog could be considered "adopting" it in some sense, but people in this world draw a strong line between the two ways of getting dogs. (A friend of mine was very active in animal rescue work and had a slogan: "Don't breed or buy while shelter pets die.")
My parents paid $10k to adopt me back in 1972. I'm sure it profited the birth mom. Does that mean I should tell people I was bought?
Surrogate mothers are paid to have babies for others: https://www.conceiveabilities.com/surrogates/surrogate-mother-pay
Post by: marble_faun on June 19, 2019, 01:39:06 PM
In dog-owner circles, there is a big differentiation in meaning between "buying" and "adopting." For some it has become a moral/political issue.
There are tons of dogs in shelters that need homes. If they aren't adopted, a lot of them will be euthanized. You do pay a small fee to the shelter to adopt, but this is not referred to as "buying."
There are also breeders and puppy mills who are producing new dogs to sell, as a for-profit enterprise, sometimes for $2,000+. Getting a dog from this type of source is referred to as buying.
Technically I suppose buying a dog could be considered "adopting" it in some sense, but people in this world draw a strong line between the two ways of getting dogs. (A friend of mine was very active in animal rescue work and had a slogan: "Don't breed or buy while shelter pets die.")
My parents paid $10k to adopt me back in 1972. I'm sure it profited the birth mom. Does that mean I should tell people I was bought?
No. The words "adopt" and "buy" have a particular meanings in the pet world, which have no bearing on human adoption.
(At least not until we arrive at some strange version of the future, with human birthing-mills and business where you go to pick out a child that has been bred for particular traits, etc. Then maybe the terms would be parallel.)
I also don't want to take this thread too far off track, so I will leave it at that!
Post by: Dicey on June 19, 2019, 02:17:02 PM
I find the term TREATS offensive when my coworkers are talking about junk food left out by the coffee. Treats are for training dogs.Yeah, but "Trick or Snack" doesn't have the same ring to it...
Actually, I'm not offended at all; I just find it funny. And it lets me feel smugly superior, which is really what life is all about.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 19, 2019, 03:50:26 PM
In dog-owner circles, there is a big differentiation in meaning between "buying" and "adopting." For some it has become a moral/political issue.Reaaaly don't want to drag this thread off topic but responsible breeders that give a shit are not making money, or at least that's not their goal. Breeding dogs is not cheap when done right. We lost money on our last litter, and came out ahead on the previous one (if you only count costs directly related to the litter). I hand-waved the numbers and that time we made almost $1/hr. And it's a ton of work and derails your life. It's a really bad way to make money.
There are tons of dogs in shelters that need homes. If they aren't adopted, a lot of them will be euthanized. You do pay a small fee to the shelter to adopt, but this is not referred to as "buying."
There are also breeders and puppy mills who are producing new dogs to sell, as a for-profit enterprise, sometimes for $2,000+. Getting a dog from this type of source is referred to as buying.
Technically I suppose buying a dog could be considered "adopting" it in some sense, but people in this world draw a strong line between the two ways of getting dogs. (A friend of mine was very active in animal rescue work and had a slogan: "Don't breed or buy while shelter pets die.")
There are plenty of backyard breeders making money cutting corners or "breeding" designer dogs, and they should be condemned, but not every breeder is a piece of shit and not every breeder is doing it for the cash.
This. Most good breeders are lucky if they break even. There are huge differences between breeders and back yard breeders and puppy mills.
Post by: Jouer on June 21, 2019, 07:38:35 AM
In dog-owner circles, there is a big differentiation in meaning between "buying" and "adopting." For some it has become a moral/political issue.
There are tons of dogs in shelters that need homes. If they aren't adopted, a lot of them will be euthanized. You do pay a small fee to the shelter to adopt, but this is not referred to as "buying."
There are also breeders and puppy mills who are producing new dogs to sell, as a for-profit enterprise, sometimes for $2,000+. Getting a dog from this type of source is referred to as buying.
Technically I suppose buying a dog could be considered "adopting" it in some sense, but people in this world draw a strong line between the two ways of getting dogs. (A friend of mine was very active in animal rescue work and had a slogan: "Don't breed or buy while shelter pets die.")
My parents paid $10k to adopt me back in 1972. I'm sure it profited the birth mom. Does that mean I should tell people I was bought?
You totally should! "I was worth $10k as a baby but now I'm worth [net worth]. I'm a great investment!!"
;-)
Post by: Cool Friend on June 21, 2019, 08:48:34 AM
Post by: SpeedReader on June 21, 2019, 10:43:44 PM
Post by: Dicey on June 21, 2019, 10:49:50 PM
Someone probably said it already, but the phrase I most wish would go away is "President Trump".Amen!
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 22, 2019, 03:18:16 AM
Someone probably said it already, but the phrase I most wish would go away is "President Trump".Amen!
Agreed!
Post by: Adam Zapple on June 23, 2019, 07:02:58 AM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on June 23, 2019, 07:05:32 AM
I may have already commented on this, and I didn't read the entire thread, but I cringe at the phrase "No worries" when it is used in place of "You're welcome." I hate it for some reason.Interesting--I actually really like it, if the intent is really there. As in "hey, it was a pleasure, don't worry about it burdening me." If it's just a rote phrase, though, then yeah...
Post by: sui generis on June 24, 2019, 02:29:10 AM
Post by: Cool Friend on June 24, 2019, 08:47:32 AM
I may have already commented on this, and I didn't read the entire thread, but I cringe at the phrase "No worries" when it is used in place of "You're welcome." I hate it for some reason.
I've somehow slipped into the habit of doing this and I feel stupid every time I say it. I don't mind when people say it to me, but for some reason I think it sounds dorky coming out of my mouth. Gonna have to condition myself to say Hakuna Matata instead.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on July 07, 2019, 01:26:21 PM
^
Here is a most unusual misspelling of "intact."
Post by: Need2Save on September 13, 2019, 06:39:00 PM
"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!
Lord help me! This is a contagious virus that I wish would die a quick death.
Post by: BicycleB on September 13, 2019, 08:26:02 PM
decimate reduce Decimate literally means reduce by one tenth. From Latin.
Decimate refers to the Roman military practice of punishing a group of soldiers by killing one in every ten of them (typically selected by lots). If we're going to get picky and only use ancient definitions for things it would be incorrect to define decimate as 'reduction by one tenth', that loses the original meaning almost entirely.
One might say that the word's meaning has been... decimated.
Post by: Nick_Miller on September 17, 2019, 09:48:46 AM
I just can't.
Post by: ketchup on September 17, 2019, 11:09:28 AM
I see people on Twitter type "imma" and tryna"But can you even?
I just can't.
Post by: BlueHouse on September 18, 2019, 02:11:38 PM
If the point is to let eligible mates know that they are available to date, then just stop at "single". If the point is to let people know that you're a mom, then just say so.
I'm bitter because my somewhat irresponsible niece is a "single mom" who expects to be congratulated for doing 'such a great job' when in fact, she's leeching off her parents due to her less-than-ideal life choices.
Post by: nessness on September 18, 2019, 02:31:23 PM
I'm pretty sure I'm going to be hated for saying this, but it really gets under my skin when people call themselves a "single mom" if they're divorced or if there is anyone acting in the second parent position. "Single mom" to me means that they're doing it all themselves, when in fact, they may be co-parenting, just living in separate homes.Huh. I don't hate you for this comment, but I don't agree with your definition either. I would consider anyone who is single and has custody of their child to be a single parent.
If the point is to let eligible mates know that they are available to date, then just stop at "single". If the point is to let people know that you're a mom, then just say so.
I'm bitter because my somewhat irresponsible niece is a "single mom" who expects to be congratulated for doing 'such a great job' when in fact, she's leeching off her parents due to her less-than-ideal life choices.
I just googled the definition and Merriam-Webster (more or less) agrees with me - "a parent who lives with a child or children and no husband, wife, or partner. " No stipulation that they have to live with the child 100% of the time.
Post by: robartsd on September 19, 2019, 09:16:21 AM
I'm pretty sure I'm going to be hated for saying this, but it really gets under my skin when people call themselves a "single mom" if they're divorced or if there is anyone acting in the second parent position. "Single mom" to me means that they're doing it all themselves, when in fact, they may be co-parenting, just living in separate homes.I know someone who lived as a single mom in a situation somewhat like your niece. She and the dad actually did get married, but he soon left them because he couldn't deal with the responsibility. She rose to the occasion and I admire the job she has done raising her son. She has worked hard at low skill jobs, and could not financially support an independent household so she continued to live with her parents. As her son got older, she started to feel that a male role model would be useful in his life, so she began pursuing divorce to free herself to remarry. I don't know the details, but eventually dad convinced her that they could try to be a family again. Their son was thrilled. I'm very impressed that she forgave him enough to give it a shot. They are still living with her aging parents; no longer because the young family needs the support, but because her parents can't make it on their own at this point. I imagine the young dad feels a bit embarrassed about his past shirking of his responsibilities; but he's working hard alongside his wife to take care of their son and also doing a lot to help care for her parents (her dad requires a lot of care at this point and son-in-law is now providing a good deal of it).
If the point is to let eligible mates know that they are available to date, then just stop at "single". If the point is to let people know that you're a mom, then just say so.
I'm bitter because my somewhat irresponsible niece is a "single mom" who expects to be congratulated for doing 'such a great job' when in fact, she's leeching off her parents due to her less-than-ideal life choices.
Sure, lots of single moms have come to the situation due to their own irresponsible choices. The equally irresponsible dads often escape responsibility. Some of the moms are fortunate enough to have supportive extended family. I think it is better to respect people's current efforts to take responsibility rather than constantly judging them for their former irresponsible choices.
Post by: Tyson on September 21, 2019, 06:59:25 PM
Post by: sui generis on September 21, 2019, 08:40:16 PM
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!
Lord help me! This is a contagious virus that I wish would die a quick death.
When I read this previously, I was like, "huh, I've never heard that!" Probably because my meetings never end early. One did yesterday and voila! You are right. It's a thing.
Post by: calimom on September 21, 2019, 09:11:11 PM
I'm pretty sure I'm going to be hated for saying this, but it really gets under my skin when people call themselves a "single mom" if they're divorced or if there is anyone acting in the second parent position. "Single mom" to me means that they're doing it all themselves, when in fact, they may be co-parenting, just living in separate homes.Huh. I don't hate you for this comment, but I don't agree with your definition either. I would consider anyone who is single and has custody of their child to be a single parent.
If the point is to let eligible mates know that they are available to date, then just stop at "single". If the point is to let people know that you're a mom, then just say so.
I'm bitter because my somewhat irresponsible niece is a "single mom" who expects to be congratulated for doing 'such a great job' when in fact, she's leeching off her parents due to her less-than-ideal life choices.
I just googled the definition and Merriam-Webster (more or less) agrees with me - "a parent who lives with a child or children and no husband, wife, or partner. " No stipulation that they have to live with the child 100% of the time.
No hate from me but for different reasons. I've been widowed and raising 3 kids alone for the past dozen years. I really, really object to women saying this either in online forums or IRL when they are married and their otherwise involved partner is out of town on business. A mother once told me she was a single mom "this week" and it was so hard.when I was trying to hurry my son along after a Little League practice. I was rushing because I needed to pick up my youngest from day care so I wouldn't be dinged with late fees and then collect my eldest who was patiently waiting for was for a ride home. The evening ahead was going to be making dinner and overseeing baths and homework for the hundredth time, and several hundred similar nights were ahead. To my great good creditI did not slap her or say anything snarky, just "oh wow, that sounds really rough!"
News flash: If your living husband whom you are not divorced from is not available for a few days you are not a "single mother".
Post by: jinga nation on September 23, 2019, 07:28:42 AM
That's an odd fragment... :-pI see people on Twitter type "imma" and tryna"But can you even?
I just can't.
Post by: frugalnacho on October 01, 2019, 11:01:16 AM
Post by: Kris on October 01, 2019, 12:51:39 PM
"He text me yesterday about it."
Post by: Dee on October 02, 2019, 09:19:32 PM
Post by: sui generis on October 02, 2019, 09:59:09 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 14, 2019, 08:49:38 AM
Post by: Kris on October 14, 2019, 09:34:13 AM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 14, 2019, 10:04:19 AM
Ugh -- people who type "weary" when they mean "wary" or "leery."
I'm guessing some of those are typos without proof-reading, or spell check "corrections".
Post by: Kris on October 14, 2019, 10:06:44 AM
Ugh -- people who type "weary" when they mean "wary" or "leery."
I'm guessing some of those are typos without proof-reading, or spell check "corrections".
I see this all. the. time. I doubt they are all typos. I see "weary" much more often than "wary" or "leery." I'm assuming the errors self-reinforce: people see others writing the word incorrectly, and then assume it's correct, so they start doing it, too.
Post by: sui generis on October 14, 2019, 11:09:27 AM
Ugh -- people who type "weary" when they mean "wary" or "leery."
I'm guessing some of those are typos without proof-reading, or spell check "corrections".
I see this all. the. time. I doubt they are all typos. I see "weary" much more often than "wary" or "leery." I'm assuming the errors self-reinforce: people see others writing the word incorrectly, and then assume it's correct, so they start doing it, too.
If weary weren't already it's own word, I'd totally advocate for combining wary and leery into one portmanteau-ish word of weary! But it's almost like the pre-existence of weary, which is legit wary and leery combined, encourages people to use weary when they mean leery/wary. I sympathize, but it totally grates still.
As a lawyer, precedence vs. precedent. Not interchangeable!
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 14, 2019, 12:30:38 PM
Ugh -- people who type "weary" when they mean "wary" or "leery."
I'm guessing some of those are typos without proof-reading, or spell check "corrections".
I see this all. the. time. I doubt they are all typos. I see "weary" much more often than "wary" or "leery." I'm assuming the errors self-reinforce: people see others writing the word incorrectly, and then assume it's correct, so they start doing it, too.
I did say "some". ;-) You would not believe the typos I find myself making, some fingers go faster than others and the letters get redistributed.
I'm sure some of it is self-reinforcing. But I would bet some of those "weary"s are from people who say "wary" as if it were "weary" and spell it accordingly. Of course I say it correctly (well my region's definition of correctly) so I spell it correctly.
Post by: frugalnacho on October 14, 2019, 12:40:02 PM
Post by: Kris on October 14, 2019, 01:08:37 PM
Ugh -- people who type "weary" when they mean "wary" or "leery."
I'm guessing some of those are typos without proof-reading, or spell check "corrections".
I see this all. the. time. I doubt they are all typos. I see "weary" much more often than "wary" or "leery." I'm assuming the errors self-reinforce: people see others writing the word incorrectly, and then assume it's correct, so they start doing it, too.
I did say "some". ;-) You would not believe the typos I find myself making, some fingers go faster than others and the letters get redistributed.
I'm sure some of it is self-reinforcing. But I would bet some of those "weary"s are from people who say "wary" as if it were "weary" and spell it accordingly. Of course I say it correctly (well my region's definition of correctly) so I spell it correctly.
I’ve never heard of a region where it’s pronounced “weary.” Do you have an example? I’m fascinated.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 14, 2019, 01:42:12 PM
Ugh -- people who type "weary" when they mean "wary" or "leery."
I'm guessing some of those are typos without proof-reading, or spell check "corrections".
I see this all. the. time. I doubt they are all typos. I see "weary" much more often than "wary" or "leery." I'm assuming the errors self-reinforce: people see others writing the word incorrectly, and then assume it's correct, so they start doing it, too.
I did say "some". ;-) You would not believe the typos I find myself making, some fingers go faster than others and the letters get redistributed.
I'm sure some of it is self-reinforcing. But I would bet some of those "weary"s are from people who say "wary" as if it were "weary" and spell it accordingly. Of course I say it correctly (well my region's definition of correctly) so I spell it correctly.
I’ve never heard of a region where it’s pronounced “weary.” Do you have an example? I’m fascinated.
No. But considering the variation in English pronunciation, I am sure someplace it happens.
The thing with the standard Canadian accent is that there actually is one, courtesy of the CBC. Sure there are regional accents, but they are not as varied as American or English (in England) ones. I was a Cub leader with three Brits, and they had three totally different accents; you would have thought they were from three different countries. Jagmeet Singh, on the other hand, has a typical Canadian accent. Canadians may look different, but by the time we are second generation we all sound pretty much the same.
I do know someone who regularly says "youse" for the English plural you, it is a local rural Ontario word.
Post by: Dicey on October 16, 2019, 06:44:31 AM
Post by: KBecks on October 16, 2019, 07:41:54 PM
Ugh.
Post by: Step37 on October 16, 2019, 11:21:36 PM
I'm pretty sure I'm going to be hated for saying this, but it really gets under my skin when people call themselves a "single mom" if they're divorced or if there is anyone acting in the second parent position. "Single mom" to me means that they're doing it all themselves, when in fact, they may be co-parenting, just living in separate homes.
If the point is to let eligible mates know that they are available to date, then just stop at "single". If the point is to let people know that you're a mom, then just say so.
I'm bitter because my somewhat irresponsible niece is a "single mom" who expects to be congratulated for doing 'such a great job' when in fact, she's leeching off her parents due to her less-than-ideal life choices.
Interesting. I haven’t looked at this thread in several months but was just part of a conversation about this issue last night. Our neighbourhood started a Single Parents Group. Someone mentioned that they objected to the title (for the same reasons you cited). Another person (who became a widow with two children at a very young age) in the group said that the “proper” term for a parent with no other parent in the picture (either deceased or deadbeat/not involved) is sole parent. I’d never given the issue any thought (not being a parent myself), but that distinction made a lot of sense to me.
Post by: GreenToTheCore on October 17, 2019, 04:16:28 PM
Interesting. I haven’t looked at this thread in several months but was just part of a conversation about this issue last night. Our neighbourhood started a Single Parents Group. Someone mentioned that they objected to the title (for the same reasons you cited). Another person (who became a widow with two children at a very young age) in the group said that the “proper” term for a parent with no other parent in the picture (either deceased or deadbeat/not involved) is sole parent. I’d never given the issue any thought (not being a parent myself), but that distinction made a lot of sense to me.Nice insight, @Step37 . This whole string is very interesting.
Edit: ridiculous spelling mistake
Post by: Dicey on October 18, 2019, 07:28:54 AM
Oh, no...Interesting. I haven’t looked at this thread in several months but was just part of a conversation about this issue last night. Our neighbourhood started a Single Parents Group. Someone mentioned that they objected to the title (for the same reasons you cited). Another person (who became a widow with two children at a very young age) in the group said that the “proper” term for a parent with no other parent in the picture (either deceased or deadbeat/not involved) is sole parent. I’d never given the issue any thought (not being a parent myself), but that distinction made a lot of sense to me.Nice incite, @Step37 . This whole string is very interesting.
Post by: ketchup on October 18, 2019, 12:59:34 PM
Someone at my work leaves the s off of possessives. Instead of saying "it is on Fred's desk" they will say "it is on Fred desk". They say it constantly and it drives me nuts.I have someone at work that overuses possessives in place of plurals. But only about half the time. Even with the same words.
Birthday's
Visitor's
Then in the next sentence: visitors
It drives me crazy.
Post by: GreenToTheCore on October 18, 2019, 01:11:56 PM
*palm to forehead*Oh, no...Interesting. I haven’t looked at this thread in several months but was just part of a conversation about this issue last night. Our neighbourhood started a Single Parents Group. Someone mentioned that they objected to the title (for the same reasons you cited). Another person (who became a widow with two children at a very young age) in the group said that the “proper” term for a parent with no other parent in the picture (either deceased or deadbeat/not involved) is sole parent. I’d never given the issue any thought (not being a parent myself), but that distinction made a lot of sense to me.Nice incite, @Step37 . This whole string is very interesting.
Post by: Travis on October 26, 2019, 05:33:05 AM
-Linking someone's name on Facebook in the comments section without saying anything else
-Quoting entire lines verbatim of the Youtube video we all just watched in the comments section of that video. No commentary, no context, just a word for word quote.
Post by: BlueHouse on October 31, 2019, 10:14:57 AM
I'm pretty sure I'm going to be hated for saying this, but it really gets under my skin when people call themselves a "single mom" if they're divorced or if there is anyone acting in the second parent position. "Single mom" to me means that they're doing it all themselves, when in fact, they may be co-parenting, just living in separate homes.Huh. I don't hate you for this comment, but I don't agree with your definition either. I would consider anyone who is single and has custody of their child to be a single parent.
If the point is to let eligible mates know that they are available to date, then just stop at "single". If the point is to let people know that you're a mom, then just say so.
I'm bitter because my somewhat irresponsible niece is a "single mom" who expects to be congratulated for doing 'such a great job' when in fact, she's leeching off her parents due to her less-than-ideal life choices.
I just googled the definition and Merriam-Webster (more or less) agrees with me - "a parent who lives with a child or children and no husband, wife, or partner. " No stipulation that they have to live with the child 100% of the time.
No hate from me but for different reasons. I've been widowed and raising 3 kids alone for the past dozen years. I really, really object to women saying this either in online forums or IRL when they are married and their otherwise involved partner is out of town on business. A mother once told me she was a single mom "this week" and it was so hard.when I was trying to hurry my son along after a Little League practice. I was rushing because I needed to pick up my youngest from day care so I wouldn't be dinged with late fees and then collect my eldest who was patiently waiting for was for a ride home. The evening ahead was going to be making dinner and overseeing baths and homework for the hundredth time, and several hundred similar nights were ahead. To my great good creditI did not slap her or say anything snarky, just "oh wow, that sounds really rough!"
News flash: If your living husband whom you are not divorced from is not available for a few days you are not a "single mother".
@calimom -- that may be why I hate it so much. My mom was widowed at age 34 with 5 children under 12. Sure, we all made it through okay, but growing up without two parents is not anything that I would ever do to a child on purpose. I still get pretty upset that there are people who do it on purpose.
p.s. you're doing a great job. Your kids will someday appreciate how hard it all was.
Interesting. I haven’t looked at this thread in several months but was just part of a conversation about this issue last night. Our neighbourhood started a Single Parents Group. Someone mentioned that they objected to the title (for the same reasons you cited). Another person (who became a widow with two children at a very young age) in the group said that the “proper” term for a parent with no other parent in the picture (either deceased or deadbeat/not involved) is sole parent. I’d never given the issue any thought (not being a parent myself), but that distinction made a lot of sense to me.
Any possibility they could have meant solo parenting? That would make more sense, wouldn't it? If you're the sole parent, does that imply cloning?
Post by: sui generis on October 31, 2019, 12:57:11 PM
Post by: Morning Glory on October 31, 2019, 01:26:12 PM
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on October 31, 2019, 05:19:55 PM
Ugh -- people who type "weary" when they mean "wary" or "leery."
I'm guessing some of those are typos without proof-reading, or spell check "corrections".
I see this all. the. time. I doubt they are all typos. I see "weary" much more often than "wary" or "leery." I'm assuming the errors self-reinforce: people see others writing the word incorrectly, and then assume it's correct, so they start doing it, too.
I did say "some". ;-) You would not believe the typos I find myself making, some fingers go faster than others and the letters get redistributed.
I'm sure some of it is self-reinforcing. But I would bet some of those "weary"s are from people who say "wary" as if it were "weary" and spell it accordingly. Of course I say it correctly (well my region's definition of correctly) so I spell it correctly.
I’ve never heard of a region where it’s pronounced “weary.” Do you have an example? I’m fascinated.
+1
Post by: BlueHouse on November 03, 2019, 04:49:20 PM
Did I mention "nare" before? The singular form of "nares" (Latin word for nostrils) is "naris". There is no such thing as "nare".
I have never heard this word before and can't wait to impress my family when I tell them to stick it up their nares. :)
Post by: DoubleDown on November 06, 2019, 10:16:46 AM
Ugh -- people who type "weary" when they mean "wary" or "leery."
I'm guessing some of those are typos without proof-reading, or spell check "corrections".
I see this all. the. time. I doubt they are all typos. I see "weary" much more often than "wary" or "leery." I'm assuming the errors self-reinforce: people see others writing the word incorrectly, and then assume it's correct, so they start doing it, too.
I did say "some". ;-) You would not believe the typos I find myself making, some fingers go faster than others and the letters get redistributed.
I'm sure some of it is self-reinforcing. But I would bet some of those "weary"s are from people who say "wary" as if it were "weary" and spell it accordingly. Of course I say it correctly (well my region's definition of correctly) so I spell it correctly.
I’ve never heard of a region where it’s pronounced “weary.” Do you have an example? I’m fascinated.
To really confuse things, my wife, who is originally from Boston, will sometimes say "I'm wearied..." And even though I know what she really means, I'll reply, "Really, you're super tired?" What she really means is, "I'm worried."
She also has some strange vegetable reference to the present condition of things, which she calls "Carrot-ly." I think that's supposed to mean "currently."
Post by: Dicey on November 06, 2019, 10:41:17 AM
Post by: sui generis on November 06, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
My Dad always pahked his cah in the Hahvahd Yahd, and told us to put our pajamas in our drawahs. He also loved Gulden's Mustard and asked anyone who was traveling West to smuggle some in their suitcase. That and a can of Brown Bread. We kids thought both were gross. Now I always have Gulden's in my fridge, but not Brown Bread. RIP, "Pops".
Wait, I'm sorry, this is literally bread in a... Can?
Post by: Roadrunner53 on November 06, 2019, 11:57:43 AM
Post by: Dicey on November 06, 2019, 12:09:18 PM
Yes, bread in a can and it is really good with cream cheese! I just had a can this week and mine had raisins. You will find them in the grocery store where baked beans are. Nice molasses flavor. Try it, you might like it!Not on the West Coast you won't. Happily, Gulden's Mustard is now available everywhere, though they recently updated their packaging, so it won't seem the same any more, alas.
Post by: ysette9 on November 06, 2019, 12:47:52 PM
Post by: ysette9 on November 06, 2019, 12:47:52 PM
Post by: ysette9 on November 06, 2019, 12:50:13 PM
https://nowthisnews.com/videos/food/bread-in-a-can-is-a-favorite-in-new-england
Post by: DoubleDown on November 06, 2019, 01:00:06 PM
Post by: Kris on November 06, 2019, 01:14:48 PM
It's only been around a few weeks AFAIK, but I hope "OK Boomer" disappears just as quickly. I'm not a baby boomer (Gen X), but that phrase seems super condescending/dismissive to me.
It was probably an inevitable boomerang effect, considering how many years "millennial" has been considered shorthand for "lazy and entitled".
Post by: sui generis on November 06, 2019, 01:29:19 PM
It's only been around a few weeks AFAIK, but I hope "OK Boomer" disappears just as quickly. I'm not a baby boomer (Gen X), but that phrase seems super condescending/dismissive to me.
It's not that it just seems super condescending and dismissive... it is absolutely intended to be super condescending and dismissive.
I'm also GenX and am not so partial to the Boomers myself, but it does seem like a waste of breath. OTOH, I am sort of surprised that Millennials still are the focus of generational disdain toward the youngs (there will always be that). Because GenZ should now be taking their place in the disdain-a-thon and yet, I see nothing but positive stuff about them. Like how they are going to save the world. Maybe it's just the political circles I travel in where people are vesting undue hope in their idealism saving the world....and I just expect them to follow the same pattern of making us all think they are gonna save the day and then not actually giving a f@*& until they are in their 40s like their predecessors have done.
Post by: Dicey on November 06, 2019, 04:58:00 PM
It's only been around a few weeks AFAIK, but I hope "OK Boomer" disappears just as quickly. I'm not a baby boomer (Gen X), but that phrase seems super condescending/dismissive to me.Any chance it will replace, "Bye, Felicia"?
Post by: Loretta on November 07, 2019, 04:10:43 AM
Post by: BlueHouse on November 07, 2019, 02:33:29 PM
As in, FYI was not clear enough, so we need to provide this information For Your Situational Awareness.
If there is some reason that this is now needed, please enlighten me. I don't want to ask anyone at work because I don't want to risk them seeing my eyes roll so far backward.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 07, 2019, 02:54:03 PM
FYSA
As in, FYI was not clear enough, so we need to provide this information For Your Situational Awareness.
If there is some reason that this is now needed, please enlighten me. I don't want to ask anyone at work because I don't want to risk them seeing my eyes roll so far backward.
Maybe for when a wild animal is rampaging through the corridors? Then you would want to be aware of the situation. ;-)
Post by: calimom on November 07, 2019, 08:26:26 PM
Post by: Dicey on November 07, 2019, 10:58:27 PM
It's only been around a few weeks AFAIK, but I hope "OK Boomer" disappears just as quickly. I'm not a baby boomer (Gen X), but that phrase seems super condescending/dismissive to me.Was in the car just long enough to hear that this phrase was the topic du jour on an afternoon talk show today. Not going to help it go away.
Post by: BlueHouse on November 25, 2019, 09:52:28 AM
I just find it super-condescending. Especially when the person saying it almost always has an opinion on whether the other person is doing something the right way.
Post by: calimom on November 25, 2019, 07:36:06 PM
Because the little lady was just sitting winsomely waiting for the man to pose The Question. Because it's not a decision they reach together. Because then he needs to announce it to the world via social media instead of it be a private moment between the two.
Post by: BlueHouse on November 26, 2019, 12:28:03 PM
"She said yes!"
Because the little lady was just sitting winsomely waiting for the man to pose The Question. Because it's not a decision they reach together. Because then he needs to announce it to the world via social media instead of it be a private moment between the two.
I never thought about this, but in a similar vein to announcing via social media instead of keeping family matters private, I despise social mourning. Any time I see someone send their condolences via twitter or even just say "R.I.P", I am so sad that the deceased didn't register enough to warrant a family visit, flowers, or even just a card.
Post by: Morning Glory on November 26, 2019, 01:32:50 PM
"She said yes!"
Because the little lady was just sitting winsomely waiting for the man to pose The Question. Because it's not a decision they reach together. Because then he needs to announce it to the world via social media instead of it be a private moment between the two.
I never thought about this, but in a similar vein to announcing via social media instead of keeping family matters private, I despise social mourning. Any time I see someone send their condolences via twitter or even just say "R.I.P", I am so sad that the deceased didn't register enough to warrant a family visit, flowers, or even just a card.
While we're at it, can we be done with gender reveals please? They were tacky to begin with, and now several people have been killed trying to one up each other on ways to reveal the baby's gender. I thought gender was becoming less important, so maybe these reveals are some kind of backlash.
Post by: KBecks on November 26, 2019, 04:27:11 PM
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on November 26, 2019, 05:19:22 PM
It's only been around a few weeks AFAIK, but I hope "OK Boomer" disappears just as quickly. I'm not a baby boomer (Gen X), but that phrase seems super condescending/dismissive to me.
I've heard that some businesses are considering banning "OK Boomer" in the workplace because some may consider it an ageist pejorative.
Post by: js82 on November 26, 2019, 05:33:51 PM
It's only been around a few weeks AFAIK, but I hope "OK Boomer" disappears just as quickly. I'm not a baby boomer (Gen X), but that phrase seems super condescending/dismissive to me.
I've heard that some businesses are considering banning "OK Boomer" in the workplace because some may consider it an ageist pejorative.
Any business where coworkers are addressing each other in that manner(assuming it's not in jest) has some pretty serious unaddressed dysfunction that will not be fixed by banning a phrase. If their solution is to ban the phrase "OK Boomer" without addressing the real underlying issues and people responsible, that's a sign of a badly-run organization.
...and do people actually use the phrase "OK Boomer" outside the context of stupid internet arguments? Because I've never seen/heard it used in any other context.
Post by: sui generis on November 26, 2019, 07:23:34 PM
Post by: slackmax on December 02, 2019, 08:42:26 AM
And 'informed by' when they really means 'affected by' or 'based upon' .
example : His ideas about gender are 'informed by' his early childhood experiences. Soooooo NPR ish. Puke!
Post by: MissNancyPryor on December 12, 2019, 10:39:47 AM
Is it because there is a generation out there now that doesn't care about a driver's license or is it that ABS technology has made it unnecessary to pump the BRAKES?
Jeebus.
Post by: Dave1442397 on December 13, 2019, 12:50:32 PM
I've seen this one a lot lately. It's "Yea or nay", people!
Post by: dandarc on December 13, 2019, 12:53:05 PM
"Yay or nay".I'm always very excited to vote yes on something. You may have asked "Yea or nay", but I responded "YAY!"
I've seen this one a lot lately. It's "Yea or nay", people!
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2019, 12:53:21 PM
"Yay or nay".
I've seen this one a lot lately. It's "Yea or nay", people!
And people who write "woah" instead of "whoa."
Post by: solon on December 13, 2019, 12:55:38 PM
"Yay or nay".
I've seen this one a lot lately. It's "Yea or nay", people!
And people who write "woah" instead of "whoa."
Woah is the preferred spelling now. You gotta keep up! https://www.wsj.com/articles/tales-of-woah-have-oldsters-saying-whoa-11568385490
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 13, 2019, 01:26:01 PM
"Yay or nay".
I've seen this one a lot lately. It's "Yea or nay", people!
And people who write "woah" instead of "whoa."
Woah is the preferred spelling now. You gotta keep up! https://www.wsj.com/articles/tales-of-woah-have-oldsters-saying-whoa-11568385490
But it's "tales of woe" not whoa or woah. Whoa means stop and woah means you made a typo.
Post by: dandarc on December 13, 2019, 01:36:14 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 14, 2019, 07:25:34 AM
Keanu Reaves might want a word with you about that RetiredAt63
He can have all the words he wants, provided he uses them properly.
Post by: SunnyDays on December 14, 2019, 10:03:38 AM
And bae, vacay, appy and cray cray and all that baby talk. We have actual words, so USE them!
Also, any verbs used as nouns, like "invite." Just bad grammar. It's amazing kids get through English class anymore.
Post by: Kris on December 14, 2019, 10:09:10 AM
Welp instead of well. I always think of a dog giving birth.
And bae, vacay, appy and cray cray and all that baby talk. We have actual words, so USE them!
Also, any verbs used as nouns, like "invite." Just bad grammar. It's amazing kids get through English class anymore.
Whelp is even worse. And I see that a lot.
Also, “Awe!” instead of “Aw!” when gushing at a cute kitty or baby.
Post by: Dave1442397 on December 16, 2019, 11:21:31 AM
Also, “Awe!” instead of “Aw!” when gushing at a cute kitty or baby.
Yes! I hate that one!
I'm also seeing a lot of errors in books these days. They must think spellcheck catches everything, but recently I've seen mix ups with phase/faze, diffuse/defuse, and clamber/clamor.
Post by: Kris on December 16, 2019, 11:23:39 AM
Also, “Awe!” instead of “Aw!” when gushing at a cute kitty or baby.
Yes! I hate that one!
I'm also seeing a lot of errors in books these days. They must think spellcheck catches everything, but recently I've seen mix ups with phase/faze, diffuse/defuse, and clamber/clamor.
Yes. I'm reading a traditionally-published book right now, and I've caught that kind of thing a number of times. It's making me a little nuts.
Post by: Kris on December 17, 2019, 06:58:23 AM
I’ve seen it used twice in best-selling traditionally-published books in the past two days. Incorrectly, of course.
Post by: Cool Friend on December 17, 2019, 07:14:15 AM
Post by: merula on December 17, 2019, 03:43:35 PM
"Yay or nay".
I've seen this one a lot lately. It's "Yea or nay", people!
And people who write "woah" instead of "whoa."
Woah is the preferred spelling now. You gotta keep up! https://www.wsj.com/articles/tales-of-woah-have-oldsters-saying-whoa-11568385490
But it's "tales of woe" not whoa or woah. Whoa means stop and woah means you made a typo.
My favorite homophone error of all time is "Whoa is me".
Post by: slackmax on December 19, 2019, 05:58:28 AM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on December 19, 2019, 06:23:26 AM
Why does every baby name have to be unique? Have you met our kids, Frambah, Schlegmuff, and Briffin? They are all so special!As someone who was given a unique name, I agree. A last name that is difficult to pronounce is one thing. A first name is something else entirely.
Our kids have "normal" names.
Post by: merula on December 19, 2019, 06:41:59 AM
Why does every baby name have to be unique? Have you met our kids, Frambah, Schlegmuff, and Briffin? They are all so special!As someone who was given a unique name, I agree. A last name that is difficult to pronounce is one thing. A first name is something else entirely.
Our kids have "normal" names.
As someone who was given a name that was massively popular for a short time (think Ashley or Jessica), I gave my kids unusual names. They aren't made-up or off-beat spellings (Wikipedia pages exist showing lists of people with the same name) but they're rare where we live, so they're the only ones at their school with those names. People who are not familiar with non-American news or sports probably think they're truly unique.
Post by: sui generis on December 19, 2019, 09:26:05 AM
Post by: SunnyDays on December 20, 2019, 07:10:49 PM
There was a study a long time ago that a disproportionate number of prisoners had unusual names. Likely doesn’t hold true now.
Unusual spellings of common names bugs me too. Pity the person who is having their name spelled wrong their whole life.
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 21, 2019, 12:50:23 AM
It's difficult enough with names with common variants like Ann/Anne and Jon/John. I have a very recognisable but currently quite uncommon name with at least four standard spellings. No one ever gets it right without several clarifications. But at least if they see it written down first they know how to pronounce it so it's never mangled when people talk to me, and once they've figures out which spelling it is it's not too hard to remember.
(Currently naming a baby, so all this is quite fresh in my mind!)
Post by: dividendman on January 01, 2020, 07:11:46 PM
Isn't the whole purpose of naming something to differentiate it from something else?
Post by: Bloop Bloop on January 01, 2020, 10:51:43 PM
Hahaha... people are annoyed at rare or unique names and spellings?
Isn't the whole purpose of naming something to differentiate it from something else?
Unless you have seventeen children and have started running out of Bobs and Marys, it's likely that any old name is going to differentiate your child for all practical purposes.
I think the trend towards everyone being unique or special is a little misguided. None of us is unique in any substantial sense, nor are we special. Better to understand that and focus on being happy, rather than trying to make a snowflake of yourself.
Post by: sui generis on January 02, 2020, 10:43:23 AM
Post by: BlueHouse on January 02, 2020, 11:45:17 AM
Randomly unusual spellings bug the hell out of me. A name should be easy to spell and to pronounce - either because it's common or at least familiar to most people, or if you want something a bit different at least make it short and reasonably phonetic so people can learn it quickly. Something like Bartholomew is not common and quite long, but I would not expect people in general to struggle to spell it because it's a standard recognised name. But Barrthulahmoo (*made up by me) - WHY?!?
It's difficult enough with names with common variants like Ann/Anne and Jon/John. I have a very recognisable but currently quite uncommon name with at least four standard spellings. No one ever gets it right without several clarifications. But at least if they see it written down first they know how to pronounce it so it's never mangled when people talk to me, and once they've figures out which spelling it is it's not too hard to remember.
(Currently naming a baby, so all this is quite fresh in my mind!)
I knew a guy named "Jon" who insisted we pronounce it "Shawn" (Sean). I can't imagine going through life having to correct everyone EVERY Single TIME.
My mother pronounces "Norfolk, VA" as "Nahfahk". She's not from there and it sounds ridiculous. She says "that's how they pronounce it!" I do not care. I also pronounce Nev-AH-da, and I enunciate ALL the letters in Baltimore even though they do not. Sometimes I ask her how she pronounces New York and Boston or even Germany because it sounds a lot different from locals. She doesn't care and that kind of makes it cute at this stage.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on January 02, 2020, 11:50:44 AM
I'm pretty annoyed by "gift" as a verb or "gifted". I thought I saw that in this thread, but don't see it on this page at least, so if on a previous page, I think it deserves to be restated! I guess I'm not sure exactly why I wish it would go away. It is actually possibly helpful as a more specific word than "give". But somehow when I see people use it, it seems very self-conscious and loaded, like there's something a bit pretentious about it. Am I imagining things?Eh, "give" isn't always specific enough, so I can forgive using "gift" as a verb. Although, the more I think about it, the more it seems like there are specific terms for other meanings of "give."
Post by: ketchup on January 02, 2020, 02:20:14 PM
Unusual spellings of common names bugs me too. Pity the person who is having their name spelled wrong their whole life.I recently met a Karyn.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on January 02, 2020, 02:39:25 PM
I know a woman named Caryn. Pronounced kuh-RIN. (lovely person, BTW, and so are her parents)Unusual spellings of common names bugs me too. Pity the person who is having their name spelled wrong their whole life.I recently met a Karyn.
Post by: iluvzbeach on January 02, 2020, 07:30:01 PM
I'm pretty annoyed by "gift" as a verb or "gifted". I thought I saw that in this thread, but don't see it on this page at least, so if on a previous page, I think it deserves to be restated! I guess I'm not sure exactly why I wish it would go away. It is actually possibly helpful as a more specific word than "give". But somehow when I see people use it, it seems very self-conscious and loaded, like there's something a bit pretentious about it. Am I imagining things?Eh, "give" isn't always specific enough, so I can forgive using "gift" as a verb. Although, the more I think about it, the more it seems like there are specific terms for other meanings of "give."
I’m pretty sure I mentioned the “gifted” thing somewhere earlier in the thread and, if I didn’t, I should have. It drives me nuts.
Post by: calimom on January 03, 2020, 06:13:10 PM
I'm pretty annoyed by "gift" as a verb or "gifted". I thought I saw that in this thread, but don't see it on this page at least, so if on a previous page, I think it deserves to be restated! I guess I'm not sure exactly why I wish it would go away. It is actually possibly helpful as a more specific word than "give". But somehow when I see people use it, it seems very self-conscious and loaded, like there's something a bit pretentious about it. Am I imagining things?Eh, "give" isn't always specific enough, so I can forgive using "gift" as a verb. Although, the more I think about it, the more it seems like there are specific terms for other meanings of "give."
I don't get why anyone would say "my sister gifted me a bath bomb for Christmas", as opposed to "my sister gave me a bath bomb for Christmas" unless you were trying to be precious with their speech. It does sound ridiculous. (not 'redic' as I noted up thread)
I’m pretty sure I mentioned the “gifted” thing somewhere earlier in the thread and, if I didn’t, I should have. It drives me nuts.
Post by: Kris on January 06, 2020, 12:11:36 PM
People writing "guttural" when they mean "visceral."
"I had a guttural reaction to that scene in the movie."
Urgh.
Post by: sui generis on January 06, 2020, 12:25:12 PM
I'm pretty annoyed by "gift" as a verb or "gifted". I thought I saw that in this thread, but don't see it on this page at least, so if on a previous page, I think it deserves to be restated! I guess I'm not sure exactly why I wish it would go away. It is actually possibly helpful as a more specific word than "give". But somehow when I see people use it, it seems very self-conscious and loaded, like there's something a bit pretentious about it. Am I imagining things?Eh, "give" isn't always specific enough, so I can forgive using "gift" as a verb. Although, the more I think about it, the more it seems like there are specific terms for other meanings of "give."
I don't get why anyone would say "my sister gifted me a bath bomb for Christmas", as opposed to "my sister gave me a bath bomb for Christmas" unless you were trying to be precious with their speech. It does sound ridiculous. (not 'redic' as I noted up thread)
I’m pretty sure I mentioned the “gifted” thing somewhere earlier in the thread and, if I didn’t, I should have. It drives me nuts.
I agree with this and think it's where my dislike comes from. While theoretically "gifted" is more specific and informative than "given", in practice, I think people almost always say why they were given something so that you know already if it was a gift or if it was because of an exchange or money or something else. There's always enough context to know whether something was a gift or not regardless of using the word "gift" or "give" so using "gift" seems redundant and why would you say something redundant because you want to emphasize it. Why would you want to emphasize that you were given a gift? Well....that's where we get into the "pretentious", "precious" and other feelings.
Post by: sui generis on January 06, 2020, 12:27:17 PM
I ran across this last night, and have seen it more and more lately:I haven't heard this one, but I'd definitely ask the person to recreate the sound for me, although I guess if it's on an internet forum or something, you'd have to ask them to describe the sound instead.
People writing "guttural" when they mean "visceral."
"I had a guttural reaction to that scene in the movie."
Urgh.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on January 06, 2020, 02:01:36 PM
I agree with this and think it's where my dislike comes from. While theoretically "gifted" is more specific and informative than "given", in practice, I think people almost always say why they were given something so that you know already if it was a gift or if it was because of an exchange or money or something else. There's always enough context to know whether something was a gift or not regardless of using the word "gift" or "give" so using "gift" seems redundant and why would you say something redundant because you want to emphasize it. Why would you want to emphasize that you were given a gift? Well....that's where we get into the "pretentious", "precious" and other feelings.Yeah, that's a good point--"gifted" only works (to my ear) if there's no other explanation for the occasion when the object was given.
Post by: GreenSheep on January 10, 2020, 06:05:35 PM
A newer one that needs to hurry up and lose its popularity is "hundred percent!" -- as in, "I agree with you one hundred percent." It seems to be especially prevalent on podcasts.
Post by: Davnasty on January 10, 2020, 08:09:23 PM
"Way, shape, or form," usually said by people who are trying to seem smart but aren't, is a redundant and tired old phrase that needs to die.
A newer one that needs to hurry up and lose its popularity is "hundred percent!" -- as in, "I agree with you one hundred percent." It seems to be especially prevalent on podcasts.
If it replaces 110% I'm perfectly OK with that.
Post by: Dee on January 11, 2020, 02:48:52 PM
Post by: Roadrunner53 on January 12, 2020, 07:12:11 AM
I can’t quite believe that there is such a thing of bread in a can. Why the hell would anyone do that?
I can’t quite believe that there is an a risky thing of bread in a can. Why the hell would anyone do that?
Canned anything goes through a factory process that is tried and true. The product goes through a time and temperature process to cook what ever is in the can. The process goes through certain regulatory agencies for approval of process and to determine consumer safety. Storage studies are conducted, microbiological testing, chemical analysis and nutritional analysis are done during shelf life studies to determine product stability and safety over the course of time.
I am sure preppers have stockpiles of canned bread.
Have an open mind. It is really tasty and many generations of people have fond memories of it being served with baked beans and hot dogs with mom and dad. Read the comments in this article:
https://newengland.com/today/food/new-england-made/bm-brown-bread-in-a-can/
Years ago I had a recipe to make bread in a can in my crock pot. Here is one: https://gingerlemongirl.blogspot.com/2012/09/slow-cooker-gluten-free-pumpkin-bread.html
Post by: Scandium on January 12, 2020, 05:58:45 PM
It's only been around a few weeks AFAIK, but I hope "OK Boomer" disappears just as quickly. I'm not a baby boomer (Gen X), but that phrase seems super condescending/dismissive to me.Haha, had to laugh at this one! For near a decade Boomers use "millennial" as a slur to describe every conceivable failing of a generation, from entitlement, lazyness, snowflakes, you name it! "ok boomer" trends on Twitter for a week and they loose their shit and won't stop whining about how mean it is, is it a hate crime, should it be banned?!
At least they continue to reinforce that boomers are the worst generation ever. They're burning the planet to a crisp, control all levers of power, grab as much wealth for themselves as they can while screwing everyone else. But hey, someone said something mean about them on Twitter!
Post by: Bloop Bloop on January 12, 2020, 06:30:28 PM
Post by: Scandium on January 12, 2020, 08:25:09 PM
Dunno, it seems more like rich boomers and rich millennials alike are conspiring to exploit the planet while poor boomers and poor millennials suffer.How many boomers and how many millennials are there at the top levels of government?
Post by: robartsd on January 13, 2020, 09:17:30 AM
For near a decade Boomers use "millennial" as a slur to describe every conceivable failing of a generation, from entitlement, lazyness, snowflakes, you name it! "ok boomer" trends on Twitter for a week and they loose their shit and won't stop whining about how mean it is, is it a hate crime, should it be banned?!Age is a protected class when over 40. Millennials aren't there yet but Boomers have been for a while, so maybe it is a hate crime.
Post by: merula on January 13, 2020, 09:26:58 AM
For near a decade Boomers use "millennial" as a slur to describe every conceivable failing of a generation, from entitlement, lazyness, snowflakes, you name it! "ok boomer" trends on Twitter for a week and they loose their shit and won't stop whining about how mean it is, is it a hate crime, should it be banned?!Age is a protected class when over 40. Millennials aren't there yet but Boomers have been for a while, so maybe it is a hate crime.
Gen-X and Millennial aren't as neatly defined as Boomers, but for some definitions the Millennial birth year range starts at 1980, so some Millennials are starting to turn 40.
Post by: Scandium on January 13, 2020, 11:36:44 AM
For near a decade Boomers use "millennial" as a slur to describe every conceivable failing of a generation, from entitlement, lazyness, snowflakes, you name it! "ok boomer" trends on Twitter for a week and they loose their shit and won't stop whining about how mean it is, is it a hate crime, should it be banned?!Age is a protected class when over 40. Millennials aren't there yet but Boomers have been for a while, so maybe it is a hate crime.
I feel for them; having spent their entire lives getting everything they want and all politics catered to them it must be shocking when someone now dare mock them.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 13, 2020, 09:59:18 PM
When I graduated university there were very few jobs. We went through massive inflation and high interest rates in the 80's, so great for affording a house (/s). Opportunities for investment were rare and had to be done through investment banks. No massive information available from the internet. All those great DIY YouTube videos mustachians love? Non-existent.
Um, Canadian politics - Justin Trudeau was born in 1971, Jagmeet Singh was born in 1979, Andrew Scheer was born in 1979. The most radical, Elizabeth May, was born in 1954, so the only boomer. Can't help it if the American system lets people stay in office forever.
Why do boomers affect politics? Because we vote. Not surprising, we were the 60's radicals (well some of us). Get everyone voting.
Post by: Wrenchturner on January 13, 2020, 10:21:39 PM
https://youtu.be/KuG5wv-D7mA
Post by: Morning Glory on January 21, 2020, 11:38:43 AM
Post by: sui generis on January 21, 2020, 06:31:23 PM
People at my work have taken to using the abbreviation f/u in emails to mean follow-up. Even though I know what they mean the other meaning is what I read in my head. "Please f/u on Wednesday with x about y". Can't wait until I retire so I can tell all of them f/u.
I've been using f/u for Follow-Up for so long, but I never use it to other people exactly for that reason! I only use it in notes to myself. It shouldn't be too hard, but I've never taken the time to figure out a different abbreviation that wouldn't be so...potentially offensive to people. We really need one, though, because sucks to type it out.
Post by: BlueHouse on January 21, 2020, 08:46:48 PM
For near a decade Boomers use "millennial" as a slur to describe every conceivable failing of a generation, from entitlement, lazyness, snowflakes, you name it! "ok boomer" trends on Twitter for a week and they loose their shit and won't stop whining about how mean it is, is it a hate crime, should it be banned?!Age is a protected class when over 40. Millennials aren't there yet but Boomers have been for a while, so maybe it is a hate crime.
Gen-X and Millennial aren't as neatly defined as Boomers, but for some definitions the Millennial birth year range starts at 1980, so some Millennials are starting to turn 40.
I said a much-deserved "Ok Boomer" to my brother-in-law (who is only a few years older than I am) and my nephew (16 years old...no idea what that makes him) thought it was hysterical. I'm sure he thinks I'm also a boomer or that the few years that I'm out-of-boomerdom don't really matter. There must be some word or phrase that kids his age use for people my age who try to appropriate their language. I suppose it would be as if my mom had started saying "Grody to the Max".
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 21, 2020, 10:31:00 PM
For near a decade Boomers use "millennial" as a slur to describe every conceivable failing of a generation, from entitlement, lazyness, snowflakes, you name it! "ok boomer" trends on Twitter for a week and they loose their shit and won't stop whining about how mean it is, is it a hate crime, should it be banned?!Age is a protected class when over 40. Millennials aren't there yet but Boomers have been for a while, so maybe it is a hate crime.
Gen-X and Millennial aren't as neatly defined as Boomers, but for some definitions the Millennial birth year range starts at 1980, so some Millennials are starting to turn 40.
I said a much-deserved "Ok Boomer" to my brother-in-law (who is only a few years older than I am) and my nephew (16 years old...no idea what that makes him) thought it was hysterical. I'm sure he thinks I'm also a boomer or that the few years that I'm out-of-boomerdom don't really matter. There must be some word or phrase that kids his age use for people my age who try to appropriate their language. I suppose it would be as if my mom had started saying "Grody to the Max".
Wasn't it "grotty" to start out with? Yep, boomer here.
I shocked my DD when she was complaining about something and I told her it was a first world problem. I suppose we aren't supposed to keep up with slang?
Post by: BlueHouse on January 22, 2020, 10:35:46 AM
I've never heard "grotty", but that doesn't mean much. Nope, we are not meant to keep up with what the young'uns say. 23-Skidoo!For near a decade Boomers use "millennial" as a slur to describe every conceivable failing of a generation, from entitlement, lazyness, snowflakes, you name it! "ok boomer" trends on Twitter for a week and they loose their shit and won't stop whining about how mean it is, is it a hate crime, should it be banned?!Age is a protected class when over 40. Millennials aren't there yet but Boomers have been for a while, so maybe it is a hate crime.
Gen-X and Millennial aren't as neatly defined as Boomers, but for some definitions the Millennial birth year range starts at 1980, so some Millennials are starting to turn 40.
I said a much-deserved "Ok Boomer" to my brother-in-law (who is only a few years older than I am) and my nephew (16 years old...no idea what that makes him) thought it was hysterical. I'm sure he thinks I'm also a boomer or that the few years that I'm out-of-boomerdom don't really matter. There must be some word or phrase that kids his age use for people my age who try to appropriate their language. I suppose it would be as if my mom had started saying "Grody to the Max".
Wasn't it "grotty" to start out with? Yep, boomer here.
I shocked my DD when she was complaining about something and I told her it was a first world problem. I suppose we aren't supposed to keep up with slang?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 22, 2020, 01:15:16 PM
I've never heard "grotty", but that doesn't mean much. Nope, we are not meant to keep up with what the young'uns say. 23-Skidoo!For near a decade Boomers use "millennial" as a slur to describe every conceivable failing of a generation, from entitlement, lazyness, snowflakes, you name it! "ok boomer" trends on Twitter for a week and they loose their shit and won't stop whining about how mean it is, is it a hate crime, should it be banned?!Age is a protected class when over 40. Millennials aren't there yet but Boomers have been for a while, so maybe it is a hate crime.
Gen-X and Millennial aren't as neatly defined as Boomers, but for some definitions the Millennial birth year range starts at 1980, so some Millennials are starting to turn 40.
I said a much-deserved "Ok Boomer" to my brother-in-law (who is only a few years older than I am) and my nephew (16 years old...no idea what that makes him) thought it was hysterical. I'm sure he thinks I'm also a boomer or that the few years that I'm out-of-boomerdom don't really matter. There must be some word or phrase that kids his age use for people my age who try to appropriate their language. I suppose it would be as if my mom had started saying "Grody to the Max".
Wasn't it "grotty" to start out with? Yep, boomer here.
I shocked my DD when she was complaining about something and I told her it was a first world problem. I suppose we aren't supposed to keep up with slang?
We don't have to use the slang, but it is good to keep up. Words change. "Gay", for example, has done a total change in meaning over my lifetime.
Post by: Morning Glory on January 22, 2020, 02:56:46 PM
I always thought "grotty" was British and "grody" was AmericanI've never heard "grotty", but that doesn't mean much. Nope, we are not meant to keep up with what the young'uns say. 23-Skidoo!For near a decade Boomers use "millennial" as a slur to describe every conceivable failing of a generation, from entitlement, lazyness, snowflakes, you name it! "ok boomer" trends on Twitter for a week and they loose their shit and won't stop whining about how mean it is, is it a hate crime, should it be banned?!Age is a protected class when over 40. Millennials aren't there yet but Boomers have been for a while, so maybe it is a hate crime.
Gen-X and Millennial aren't as neatly defined as Boomers, but for some definitions the Millennial birth year range starts at 1980, so some Millennials are starting to turn 40.
I said a much-deserved "Ok Boomer" to my brother-in-law (who is only a few years older than I am) and my nephew (16 years old...no idea what that makes him) thought it was hysterical. I'm sure he thinks I'm also a boomer or that the few years that I'm out-of-boomerdom don't really matter. There must be some word or phrase that kids his age use for people my age who try to appropriate their language. I suppose it would be as if my mom had started saying "Grody to the Max".
Wasn't it "grotty" to start out with? Yep, boomer here.
I shocked my DD when she was complaining about something and I told her it was a first world problem. I suppose we aren't supposed to keep up with slang?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 22, 2020, 07:04:13 PM
I always thought "grotty" was British and "grody" was AmericanI've never heard "grotty", but that doesn't mean much. Nope, we are not meant to keep up with what the young'uns say. 23-Skidoo!For near a decade Boomers use "millennial" as a slur to describe every conceivable failing of a generation, from entitlement, lazyness, snowflakes, you name it! "ok boomer" trends on Twitter for a week and they loose their shit and won't stop whining about how mean it is, is it a hate crime, should it be banned?!Age is a protected class when over 40. Millennials aren't there yet but Boomers have been for a while, so maybe it is a hate crime.
Gen-X and Millennial aren't as neatly defined as Boomers, but for some definitions the Millennial birth year range starts at 1980, so some Millennials are starting to turn 40.
I said a much-deserved "Ok Boomer" to my brother-in-law (who is only a few years older than I am) and my nephew (16 years old...no idea what that makes him) thought it was hysterical. I'm sure he thinks I'm also a boomer or that the few years that I'm out-of-boomerdom don't really matter. There must be some word or phrase that kids his age use for people my age who try to appropriate their language. I suppose it would be as if my mom had started saying "Grody to the Max".
Wasn't it "grotty" to start out with? Yep, boomer here.
I shocked my DD when she was complaining about something and I told her it was a first world problem. I suppose we aren't supposed to keep up with slang?
I'm Canadian, caught between 2 spelling systems.
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on January 23, 2020, 05:00:17 AM
Post by: Morning Glory on January 23, 2020, 05:02:30 AM
This has probably been mentioned before, but I hate when people use the word leverage when they should have used the word use. I had to sit through two management presentations yesterday like that. I wish I was keeping track of how many times he said leverage. He probably said it 50 times.
He overleveraged the word leverage.
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on January 23, 2020, 05:05:40 AM
This has probably been mentioned before, but I hate when people use the word leverage when they should have used the word use. I had to sit through two management presentations yesterday like that. I wish I was keeping track of how many times he said leverage. He probably said it 50 times.
He overleveraged the word leverage.
:D lol
Post by: frugalnacho on January 23, 2020, 06:50:46 AM
This has probably been mentioned before, but I hate when people use the word leverage when they should have used the word use. I had to sit through two management presentations yesterday like that. I wish I was keeping track of how many times he said leverage. He probably said it 50 times.
Don't those mean the same thing? Leverage often has a connotation of using something borrowed in finance, but I thought using something to its maximum potential was a correct usage as well. He's leveraging his vocabulary.
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on January 23, 2020, 06:55:52 AM
This has probably been mentioned before, but I hate when people use the word leverage when they should have used the word use. I had to sit through two management presentations yesterday like that. I wish I was keeping track of how many times he said leverage. He probably said it 50 times.
Don't those mean the same thing? Leverage often has a connotation of using something borrowed in finance, but I thought using something to its maximum potential was a correct usage as well. He's leveraging his vocabulary.
You can use leverage instead of use, but leverage is just corporate bullspeak and more cumbersome than just using use.
Post by: merula on January 23, 2020, 07:03:59 AM
This has probably been mentioned before, but I hate when people use the word leverage when they should have used the word use. I had to sit through two management presentations yesterday like that. I wish I was keeping track of how many times he said leverage. He probably said it 50 times.
Don't those mean the same thing? Leverage often has a connotation of using something borrowed in finance, but I thought using something to its maximum potential was a correct usage as well. He's leveraging his vocabulary.
I don't get the hate on "leverage". Leverage means using something to increase the amount of force for the same amount of effort. That can be concrete "I leveraged the plank to lift the boulder", or metaphoric "I leveraged my professional relationships to make the deal."
Another way of saying it is that leverage means to use to maximum advantage, so if you're saying that "use" would've been more correct, you may be missing the additional implication of "to maximum advantage".
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on January 23, 2020, 07:16:21 AM
This has probably been mentioned before, but I hate when people use the word leverage when they should have used the word use. I had to sit through two management presentations yesterday like that. I wish I was keeping track of how many times he said leverage. He probably said it 50 times.
Don't those mean the same thing? Leverage often has a connotation of using something borrowed in finance, but I thought using something to its maximum potential was a correct usage as well. He's leveraging his vocabulary.
I don't get the hate on "leverage". Leverage means using something to increase the amount of force for the same amount of effort. That can be concrete "I leveraged the plank to lift the boulder", or metaphoric "I leveraged my professional relationships to make the deal."
Another way of saying it is that leverage means to use to maximum advantage, so if you're saying that "use" would've been more correct, you may be missing the additional implication of "to maximum advantage".
No. He was just using leverage to make it sound like he had more authority. Use was definitely the word he wanted to use. I think a lot us are so used to hearing leverage bandied about that we don’t really notice it being misused.
Post by: Morning Glory on January 23, 2020, 10:44:11 AM
Leverage is just like utilize. If you overutilize utilize it makes people want to utilize earplugs.This has probably been mentioned before, but I hate when people use the word leverage when they should have used the word use. I had to sit through two management presentations yesterday like that. I wish I was keeping track of how many times he said leverage. He probably said it 50 times.
Don't those mean the same thing? Leverage often has a connotation of using something borrowed in finance, but I thought using something to its maximum potential was a correct usage as well. He's leveraging his vocabulary.
I don't get the hate on "leverage". Leverage means using something to increase the amount of force for the same amount of effort. That can be concrete "I leveraged the plank to lift the boulder", or metaphoric "I leveraged my professional relationships to make the deal."
Another way of saying it is that leverage means to use to maximum advantage, so if you're saying that "use" would've been more correct, you may be missing the additional implication of "to maximum advantage".
No. He was just using leverage to make it sound like he had more authority. Use was definitely the word he wanted to use. I think a lot us are so used to hearing leverage bandied about that we don’t really notice it being misused.
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on January 23, 2020, 10:49:31 AM
Leverage is just like utilize. If you overutilize utilize it makes people want to utilize earplugs.This has probably been mentioned before, but I hate when people use the word leverage when they should have used the word use. I had to sit through two management presentations yesterday like that. I wish I was keeping track of how many times he said leverage. He probably said it 50 times.
Don't those mean the same thing? Leverage often has a connotation of using something borrowed in finance, but I thought using something to its maximum potential was a correct usage as well. He's leveraging his vocabulary.
I don't get the hate on "leverage". Leverage means using something to increase the amount of force for the same amount of effort. That can be concrete "I leveraged the plank to lift the boulder", or metaphoric "I leveraged my professional relationships to make the deal."
Another way of saying it is that leverage means to use to maximum advantage, so if you're saying that "use" would've been more correct, you may be missing the additional implication of "to maximum advantage".
No. He was just using leverage to make it sound like he had more authority. Use was definitely the word he wanted to use. I think a lot us are so used to hearing leverage bandied about that we don’t really notice it being misused.
Exactly :D
Post by: Miss Piggy on January 23, 2020, 06:54:47 PM
This has probably been mentioned before, but I hate when people use the word leverage when they should have used the word use. I had to sit through two management presentations yesterday like that. I wish I was keeping track of how many times he said leverage. He probably said it 50 times.
Every day, I want to add "leverage" to this thread, but I can't help but think it's already here 50 times. Nonetheless, I will add to the leverage-hating chorus here. It is my most-hated business buzzword.
Post by: Bloop Bloop on January 23, 2020, 07:43:31 PM
Leverage is fine if there is a physical or metaphorical lever, but otherwise I throw it in the "paradigm" / "synergy" box of corporate speak.
Also dislike "simplistic" when used improperly.
Also hate "privileged" or "privileged to be..." when used as a humblebrag or preceding an announcement. Unless you're going to Eton or receiving a knighthood. Then you can use it.
Also hate announcements/humblebrags being preceded by "Humbled to be..." because if you really were humble you wouldn't be splashing it on LinkedIn.
I have no issues with bragging about your accomplishments. Just fucking say it, asshole. Own it.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on January 24, 2020, 08:56:49 AM
I knew a guy named "Jon" who insisted we pronounce it "Shawn" (Sean). I can't imagine going through life having to correct everyone EVERY Single TIME.
My mother pronounces "Norfolk, VA" as "Nahfahk". She's not from there and it sounds ridiculous. She says "that's how they pronounce it!" I do not care. I also pronounce Nev-AH-da, and I enunciate ALL the letters in Baltimore even though they do not. Sometimes I ask her how she pronounces New York and Boston or even Germany because it sounds a lot different from locals. She doesn't care and that kind of makes it cute at this stage.
The second "c" in Connecticut is silent but I've heard the word pronounced as if it isn't.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on January 24, 2020, 09:00:51 AM
I'm pretty annoyed by "gift" as a verb or "gifted".
I dislike it too.
I guess I'm not sure exactly why I wish it would go away.
+1
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on January 24, 2020, 09:07:33 AM
I knew a guy named "Jon" who insisted we pronounce it "Shawn" (Sean). I can't imagine going through life having to correct everyone EVERY Single TIME.
My mother pronounces "Norfolk, VA" as "Nahfahk". She's not from there and it sounds ridiculous. She says "that's how they pronounce it!" I do not care. I also pronounce Nev-AH-da, and I enunciate ALL the letters in Baltimore even though they do not. Sometimes I ask her how she pronounces New York and Boston or even Germany because it sounds a lot different from locals. She doesn't care and that kind of makes it cute at this stage.
The second "c" in Connecticut is silent but I've heard the word pronounced as if it isn't.
Illi-noise is one I hear pretty frequently. Never heard a Connect-icut in the wild :D
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on January 24, 2020, 03:25:16 PM
I knew a guy named "Jon" who insisted we pronounce it "Shawn" (Sean). I can't imagine going through life having to correct everyone EVERY Single TIME.
My mother pronounces "Norfolk, VA" as "Nahfahk". She's not from there and it sounds ridiculous. She says "that's how they pronounce it!" I do not care. I also pronounce Nev-AH-da, and I enunciate ALL the letters in Baltimore even though they do not. Sometimes I ask her how she pronounces New York and Boston or even Germany because it sounds a lot different from locals. She doesn't care and that kind of makes it cute at this stage.
The second "c" in Connecticut is silent but I've heard the word pronounced as if it isn't.
Illi-noise is one I hear pretty frequently.
+1
Never heard a Connect-icut in the wild :D
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on January 24, 2020, 03:28:58 PM
Someone wrote that they board a hole in something.
The correct word is "bored."
Post by: Dave1442397 on January 25, 2020, 05:46:23 PM
The second "c" in Connecticut is silent but I've heard the word pronounced as if it isn't.
That was me as a kid. Being in a different country, I never heard anyone pronounce Connecticut, so when I read A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, I pronounced that second c every time.
Post by: marble_faun on January 25, 2020, 07:34:09 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on January 26, 2020, 06:27:18 AM
"It sure is quiet today."
"Wow, it looks like you're really busy today, but I'm sure it helps the day go quickly, right? Har har."
I don't know why this bothered me so much when I worked in customer service oriented jobs, but it did. And now I cringe when I'm out with someone else and they make a comment like this to a cashier, a bank teller, etc. Often it's not actually that slow behind the scenes -- it just seems that way from the surface -- or it was super busy and it just finally calmed down. And I've never "appreciated" busy days. I'd much rather chat with my coworkers or check my email, thank you very much, but I couldn't say that to a customer.
Post by: Morning Glory on January 26, 2020, 07:55:28 AM
"Is it always this slow here?"
"It sure is quiet today."
"Wow, it looks like you're really busy today, but I'm sure it helps the day go quickly, right? Har har."
I don't know why this bothered me so much when I worked in customer service oriented jobs, but it did. And now I cringe when I'm out with someone else and they make a comment like this to a cashier, a bank teller, etc. Often it's not actually that slow behind the scenes -- it just seems that way from the surface -- or it was super busy and it just finally calmed down. And I've never "appreciated" busy days. I'd much rather chat with my coworkers or check my email, thank you very much, but I couldn't say that to a customer.
In healthcare we are very superstitious about not saying that q word you just mentioned.
Post by: js82 on January 26, 2020, 06:06:06 PM
I knew a guy named "Jon" who insisted we pronounce it "Shawn" (Sean). I can't imagine going through life having to correct everyone EVERY Single TIME.
My mother pronounces "Norfolk, VA" as "Nahfahk". She's not from there and it sounds ridiculous. She says "that's how they pronounce it!" I do not care. I also pronounce Nev-AH-da, and I enunciate ALL the letters in Baltimore even though they do not. Sometimes I ask her how she pronounces New York and Boston or even Germany because it sounds a lot different from locals. She doesn't care and that kind of makes it cute at this stage.
The second "c" in Connecticut is silent but I've heard the word pronounced as if it isn't.
Illi-noise is one I hear pretty frequently. Never heard a Connect-icut in the wild :D
I prefer "Ill-eh-nwaw," personally. ;)
Post by: Monocle Money Mouth on January 27, 2020, 08:11:03 AM
I knew a guy named "Jon" who insisted we pronounce it "Shawn" (Sean). I can't imagine going through life having to correct everyone EVERY Single TIME.
My mother pronounces "Norfolk, VA" as "Nahfahk". She's not from there and it sounds ridiculous. She says "that's how they pronounce it!" I do not care. I also pronounce Nev-AH-da, and I enunciate ALL the letters in Baltimore even though they do not. Sometimes I ask her how she pronounces New York and Boston or even Germany because it sounds a lot different from locals. She doesn't care and that kind of makes it cute at this stage.
The second "c" in Connecticut is silent but I've heard the word pronounced as if it isn't.
Illi-noise is one I hear pretty frequently. Never heard a Connect-icut in the wild :D
I prefer "Ill-eh-nwaw," personally. ;)
Ooh la la Mr. Frenchy Pants. :D
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on February 18, 2020, 05:13:15 AM
On Valentine's Day I saw it abbreviated "VD."
EEK!
Post by: Dicey on February 18, 2020, 05:44:21 AM
Valentine's Day is a day of love and romance and sex and pillow talk.In high school, I had a classmate named "Valerie Dennis". One day a teacher had a list of essay topics listed on the board. We were instructed to come to the board as we were called on and put our initials next to the topic of our choice. When it was her turn, this classmate bucked the trend and wrote "Val D" instead of just her initials. How awful for her to sit there waiting for her turn to be called, and what a wise workaround she devised! On reflection, this teacher was such a weirdo that he probably invented this whole scenario just to see her squirm.
On Valentine's Day I saw it abbreviated "VD."
EEK!
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on February 18, 2020, 06:25:51 AM
Valentine's Day is a day of love and romance and sex and pillow talk.In high school, I had a classmate named "Valerie Dennis". One day a teacher had a list of essay topics listed on the board. We were instructed to come to the board as we were called on and put our initials next to the topic of our choice. When it was her turn, this classmate bucked the trend and wrote "Val D" instead of just her initials. How awful for her to sit there waiting for her turn to be called, and what a wise workaround she devised! On reflection, this teacher was such a weirdo that he probably invented this whole scenario just to see her squirm.
On Valentine's Day I saw it abbreviated "VD."
EEK!
What a louse!
Post by: Dicey on February 18, 2020, 04:32:08 PM
He was an odd duck. He would would record a well-known radio show that played all kinds of crazy shit and then play it at low volume during tests. Damn if you didn't catch yourself listening to it when you should have been concentrating on your test.Valentine's Day is a day of love and romance and sex and pillow talk.In high school, I had a classmate named "Valerie Dennis". One day a teacher had a list of essay topics listed on the board. We were instructed to come to the board as we were called on and put our initials next to the topic of our choice. When it was her turn, this classmate bucked the trend and wrote "Val D" instead of just her initials. How awful for her to sit there waiting for her turn to be called, and what a wise workaround she devised! On reflection, this teacher was such a weirdo that he probably invented this whole scenario just to see her squirm.
On Valentine's Day I saw it abbreviated "VD."
EEK!
What a louse!
Post by: Loretta on February 18, 2020, 08:04:51 PM
Post by: sui generis on February 18, 2020, 09:03:51 PM
“Dumpster fire” used to describe a small inconvenient problem. So overly dramatic.
Aww, I love dumpster fire! I mean, isn't a dumpster fire in fact a small inconvenient problem in the scale of fires? It's contained, it's much smaller than a building, usually there aren't, like, humans inside that could be in danger of their lives. Sounds like accurate level of drama!
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on February 19, 2020, 08:37:08 AM
“Dumpster fire” used to describe a small inconvenient problem. So overly dramatic.
I've only heard or read the phrase to mean an actual fire in a dumpster.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on February 19, 2020, 08:40:26 AM
I was reading some residential energy-audit reports and in one the auditor had to describe the weather on the day of the audit.
He wrote that it was sonny instead of sunny.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on February 19, 2020, 08:47:13 AM
He was an odd duck. He would would record a well-known radio show that played all kinds of crazy shit and then play it at low volume during tests. Damn if you didn't catch yourself listening to it when you should have been concentrating on your test.Valentine's Day is a day of love and romance and sex and pillow talk.In high school, I had a classmate named "Valerie Dennis". One day a teacher had a list of essay topics listed on the board. We were instructed to come to the board as we were called on and put our initials next to the topic of our choice. When it was her turn, this classmate bucked the trend and wrote "Val D" instead of just her initials. How awful for her to sit there waiting for her turn to be called, and what a wise workaround she devised! On reflection, this teacher was such a weirdo that he probably invented this whole scenario just to see her squirm.
On Valentine's Day I saw it abbreviated "VD."
EEK!
What a louse!
What a creepy oddball!
Post by: BlueHouse on February 24, 2020, 08:41:36 AM
I thought circa was used mainly when referring to dates, and in the sense that you don't know the exact number. So when someone says they make circa $50K, do they not know what they earn? Or is this just the new term-du-jour?
Post by: soccerluvof4 on February 24, 2020, 03:59:20 PM
Post by: GuitarStv on February 25, 2020, 09:13:51 AM
Democratic Socialist
Agreed. It's superfluous . . . as we already have 'sensible'.
Post by: Miss Piggy on February 26, 2020, 09:11:31 AM
why are so many people using "circa" recently instead of "about" or "approximately"?
I thought circa was used mainly when referring to dates, and in the sense that you don't know the exact number. So when someone says they make circa $50K, do they not know what they earn? Or is this just the new term-du-jour?
Ugh. I'm seeing "circa" used in restaurant names now, too. I guess it's supposed to imply foods from around the area. Just stop.
Post by: sui generis on March 12, 2020, 04:45:42 PM
Usually said by a person bragging about having obtained a single statistic or "fact" enabling them to rationalize a decision they had already made. I swear I've heard this a half dozen times this week at least.
Post by: solon on March 12, 2020, 04:49:52 PM
why are so many people using "circa" recently instead of "about" or "approximately"?
I thought circa was used mainly when referring to dates, and in the sense that you don't know the exact number. So when someone says they make circa $50K, do they not know what they earn? Or is this just the new term-du-jour?
Ugh. I'm seeing "circa" used in restaurant names now, too. I guess it's supposed to imply foods from around the area. Just stop.
I've never seen this. Does anyone have an example?
Post by: GreenSheep on March 12, 2020, 05:07:20 PM
"I'm a data person."
Usually said by a person bragging about having obtained a single statistic or "fact" enabling them to rationalize a decision they had already made. I swear I've heard this a half dozen times this week at least.
This made me think of all the people who say, "I'm a visual person." Aside from those who are blind, it seems that all humans are very visual. Even in our language, we can't escape it. "It looks like..." "It appears that..." "Do you see what I mean?" "Look, what I mean is..." Relying heavily on your eyes doesn't make you special. In fact, I would argue that those who are able to navigate the world without sight are the particularly talented ones.
Post by: Miss Piggy on March 12, 2020, 05:42:28 PM
why are so many people using "circa" recently instead of "about" or "approximately"?
I thought circa was used mainly when referring to dates, and in the sense that you don't know the exact number. So when someone says they make circa $50K, do they not know what they earn? Or is this just the new term-du-jour?
Ugh. I'm seeing "circa" used in restaurant names now, too. I guess it's supposed to imply foods from around the area. Just stop.
I've never seen this. Does anyone have an example?
Nashville: https://circagrill.com/our-story/
St. Louis: https://www.stlmag.com/dining/now-open-circa-stl-in-des-peres-square/
Seattle: https://www.circalove.com/
Las Vegas: https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/hotels/2020/01/22/las-vegas-circa-resort-casino-restaurants-pool-food-steak-bbq/4543257002/
...to name a few.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on March 18, 2020, 02:48:47 PM
He uttered "tremendous," AGAIN.
Is Trump capable of flapping his yap without saying "tremendous"?
I CAN'T STAND IT!
Post by: iris lily on March 18, 2020, 04:07:02 PM
...
Is Trump capable of flapping his yap without saying "tremendous"?
I CAN'T STAND IT!
Yes. His other T word is “ Terrific.”
Try to keep up.
Ha ha, I had exactly the same thought as you last week when I listen to a bit of a press conference. Those keywords were uttered in the short time I listened to it and I suppose throughout the broadcast.
Post by: GreenSheep on March 18, 2020, 04:29:39 PM
...
Is Trump capable of flapping his yap without saying "tremendous"?
I CAN'T STAND IT!
Yes. His other T word is “ Terrific.”
Try to keep up.
Ha ha, I had exactly the same thought as you last week when I listen to a bit of a press conference. Those keywords were uttered in the short time I listened to it and I suppose throughout the broadcast.
Oh, but come on, it makes for a great drinking game! :-) One sip of a quarantini every time he says either word. I counted 9 tremendouses in the first few minutes of the last press conference I listened to. Might be best to water down your quarantini!
https://thenovicechefblog.com/quarantini/
(This feels like it needs a disclaimer. I am taking this situation seriously, following public health recommendations, staying home, and sticking to my usual 2 drinks per week limit. Sometimes a bit of humor helps with a difficult situation.)
Post by: Luke Warm on March 25, 2020, 09:24:08 AM
Post by: Kris on March 25, 2020, 09:26:19 AM
in a nutshell. i seem to be hearing that a lot lately. why a nutshell?
In complicated, uncertain times, people seek easy explanations. Maybe that's why?
Post by: frugalnacho on March 25, 2020, 09:35:28 AM
in a nutshell. i seem to be hearing that a lot lately. why a nutshell?
In complicated, uncertain times, people seek easy explanations. Maybe that's why?
This is it, in a nutshell.
Post by: Morning Glory on March 25, 2020, 09:38:26 AM
I started hearing that one from management types just recently.
Post by: sui generis on March 25, 2020, 10:56:44 AM
Quote
A funny thing about quarantining is hearing your partner in full work mode for the first time. Like, I’m married to a “let’s circle back” guy — who knew?
https://www.workingmother.com/spouses-share-hilarious-things-theyve-learned-about-their-partner-working-from-home
Post by: Roadrunner53 on May 02, 2020, 06:27:50 AM
Can't we use language for the average Joe?
Post by: DoubleDown on May 02, 2020, 10:16:00 AM
"I'm a data person."
Usually said by a person bragging about having obtained a single statistic or "fact" enabling them to rationalize a decision they had already made. I swear I've heard this a half dozen times this week at least.
This made me think of all the people who say, "I'm a visual person." Aside from those who are blind, it seems that all humans are very visual. Even in our language, we can't escape it. "It looks like..." "It appears that..." "Do you see what I mean?" "Look, what I mean is..." Relying heavily on your eyes doesn't make you special. In fact, I would argue that those who are able to navigate the world without sight are the particularly talented ones.
Similarly, people who claim to have a "photographic memory." IF such a phenomenon even exists (it probably doesn't), it's likely so rare as to be possessed by a handful of people in the history of humankind. Yet, I hear many people claim to have it. I'm thinking, "Really? So if I show you a page in a book, you can recite it back to me verbatim after you 'photograph' it in your mind?"
Post by: frugalnacho on May 02, 2020, 09:02:01 PM
Post by: Travis on May 02, 2020, 09:37:05 PM
"I'm a data person."
Usually said by a person bragging about having obtained a single statistic or "fact" enabling them to rationalize a decision they had already made. I swear I've heard this a half dozen times this week at least.
This made me think of all the people who say, "I'm a visual person." Aside from those who are blind, it seems that all humans are very visual. Even in our language, we can't escape it. "It looks like..." "It appears that..." "Do you see what I mean?" "Look, what I mean is..." Relying heavily on your eyes doesn't make you special. In fact, I would argue that those who are able to navigate the world without sight are the particularly talented ones.
Similarly, people who claim to have a "photographic memory." IF such a phenomenon even exists (it probably doesn't), it's likely so rare as to be possessed by a handful of people in the history of humankind. Yet, I hear many people claim to have it. I'm thinking, "Really? So if I show you a page in a book, you can recite it back to me verbatim after you 'photograph' it in your mind?"
Allegedly there are a few such people out there. I saw a show with a guy who can draw or paint in fine detail something he observed for a few minutes (the cityscape of New York from a helicopter window was the test they gave him). I saw another interview with a woman who claimed to be able to remember everything that happened in her life. According to her it sucks. It's not just that she remembers everything, she can't forget even the crappy parts of her life.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2017/apr/27/the-perfect-memory-does-it-even-exist (https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2017/apr/27/the-perfect-memory-does-it-even-exist)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperthymesia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperthymesia)
Post by: Dicey on May 02, 2020, 10:14:38 PM
IIRC (snirt), the actress Marilu Henner has this ability."I'm a data person."
Usually said by a person bragging about having obtained a single statistic or "fact" enabling them to rationalize a decision they had already made. I swear I've heard this a half dozen times this week at least.
This made me think of all the people who say, "I'm a visual person." Aside from those who are blind, it seems that all humans are very visual. Even in our language, we can't escape it. "It looks like..." "It appears that..." "Do you see what I mean?" "Look, what I mean is..." Relying heavily on your eyes doesn't make you special. In fact, I would argue that those who are able to navigate the world without sight are the particularly talented ones.
Similarly, people who claim to have a "photographic memory." IF such a phenomenon even exists (it probably doesn't), it's likely so rare as to be possessed by a handful of people in the history of humankind. Yet, I hear many people claim to have it. I'm thinking, "Really? So if I show you a page in a book, you can recite it back to me verbatim after you 'photograph' it in your mind?"
Allegedly there are a few such people out there. I saw a show with a guy who can draw or paint in fine detail something he observed for a few minutes (the cityscape of New York from a helicopter window was the test they gave him). I saw another interview with a woman who claimed to be able to remember everything that happened in her life. According to her it sucks. It's not just that she remembers everything, she can't forget even the crappy parts of her life.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2017/apr/27/the-perfect-memory-does-it-even-exist (https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2017/apr/27/the-perfect-memory-does-it-even-exist)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperthymesia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperthymesia)
Post by: slackmax on May 03, 2020, 09:32:02 AM
or, equally awful... 'Use Joe's restaurant when you're Pizzaing!'
Ugh.... Why? Just why?.....
They do get my attention, and make me avoid them.
Post by: sui generis on May 03, 2020, 10:26:21 AM
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on May 03, 2020, 02:02:38 PM
I've never seen it until this morning.
Someone was selling a bike that included a spair seat.
Of course, the correct spelling is spare.
Post by: Travis on May 03, 2020, 06:38:01 PM
Those oh-so-cute commercials that have to turn a noun into a verb. Eg. 'Change the way you vitamin!' for a vitamin commercial.
or, equally awful... 'Use Joe's restaurant when you're Pizzaing!'
Ugh.... Why? Just why?.....
They do get my attention, and make me avoid them.
A version of Buffy Speak
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BuffySpeak (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BuffySpeak)
Post by: Freedomin5 on May 04, 2020, 08:54:15 AM
"No offense, but..."
When I see that, I know your meaning is, "I entirely intend to offend you and tell you how much you suck, but I'm trying to cover my meanness and unkind thoughts with the thinnest veneer of civility that everyone can see through."
Post by: SailingOnASmallSailboat on May 04, 2020, 11:30:53 AM
I don't know if this one has been brought up before, but I was reminded how much I hate the phrase below when I read it today on the forum when a newbie poster was attacking another forum member.
"No offense, but..."
When I see that, I know your meaning is, "I entirely intend to offend you and tell you how much you suck, but I'm trying to cover my meanness and unkind thoughts with the thinnest veneer of civility that everyone can see through."
100%
Post by: marble_faun on May 05, 2020, 07:05:21 AM
This might be a controversial one, but I'm tired of COVID platitudes like "We're all in this together." No we're not. The political divide remains huge, the experiences of wealthy and poor through this are quite different, and everyone is having their own experience and reaction. The phrase just seems delusional, or just condescending at best.
Post by: GreenSheep on May 05, 2020, 08:33:24 AM
For example:
Person A: "I really think saving money is a good idea."
Person B: "No, you're right, I totally agree!"
Um... what? Somehow this has crept into casual speech, as well as podcasts and other interviews, and I don't know if it's just an American thing or what, but it's insane.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on May 05, 2020, 09:02:31 AM
Post by: Travis on May 05, 2020, 06:17:09 PM
"No" when the person really means "yes."
For example:
Person A: "I really think saving money is a good idea."
Person B: "No, you're right, I totally agree!"
Um... what? Somehow this has crept into casual speech, as well as podcasts and other interviews, and I don't know if it's just an American thing or what, but it's insane.
Similar to that verbal tic, my 10 year old son will say "I mean" as if to correct himself as the second or third word of whatever it is he wanted to say. Every time he does it I think "how can you be trying to correct yourself, you haven't said anything yet!'
Post by: LaineyAZ on May 05, 2020, 06:19:49 PM
This one is so common it's starting to make me wonder if Spelling is even graded in school, or if it's just ignored, like in kindergarten, with the hope that teens will eventually catch on?
Post by: Dee on May 05, 2020, 06:22:06 PM
Another one that irritates me is the use of "I'm sure that..." to mean "I hope that..."or "I expect that..." but I have no way of knowing of sure.
Post by: DoubleDown on May 06, 2020, 09:18:37 AM
Q. "How does your company make money?"
A. "So, we've set up an online ordering system..."
Q. "How do you propose to build this house?"
A. "So, we'll start by pouring a concrete foundation..."
Q. "Why should I invest with you?"
A. "So, we're a really fast-moving company with a lot of potential..."
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 06, 2020, 10:14:28 AM
And starting every sentence or answer with "So..." In almost every case the "so" is unnecessary, it's not being used to explain the phrase that follows. It's just some kind of weird verbal tic. I used to see this a lot on the few occasions I watched "Shark Tank," where many (mostly young) entrepreneurs would start EVERY SINGLE ANSWER with "So.."
Q. "How does your company make money?"
A. "So, we've set up an online ordering system..."
Q. "How do you propose to build this house?"
A. "So, we'll start by pouring a concrete foundation..."
Q. "Why should I invest with you?"
A. "So, we're a really fast-moving company with a lot of potential..."
So, the new um.
Post by: Travis on May 06, 2020, 08:14:34 PM
And starting every sentence or answer with "So..." In almost every case the "so" is unnecessary, it's not being used to explain the phrase that follows. It's just some kind of weird verbal tic. I used to see this a lot on the few occasions I watched "Shark Tank," where many (mostly young) entrepreneurs would start EVERY SINGLE ANSWER with "So.."
Q. "How does your company make money?"
A. "So, we've set up an online ordering system..."
Q. "How do you propose to build this house?"
A. "So, we'll start by pouring a concrete foundation..."
Q. "Why should I invest with you?"
A. "So, we're a really fast-moving company with a lot of potential..."
So, the new um.
My wife's berserk button. She was a national-level debate competitor in high school and these kinds of slips drive her nuts. In my experience it's a sign of a lack of preparedness when speaking, whether that be an unrehearsed speech or simply your mouth moving faster than your brain. I find that I will be slow to respond to a question at times because I'm gathering the right words in my head to avoid filling the space with "um". I will repeat myself a lot too while this mental indexing is taking place. I suck at giving pep talks.
Post by: GreenSheep on May 07, 2020, 05:01:31 PM
Post by: SailingOnASmallSailboat on May 07, 2020, 05:07:32 PM
"balling" when the person means "bawling".
There are no words.
Post by: Travis on May 07, 2020, 06:40:07 PM
Similar to "So..." or maybe a longer form of "so," I've noticed several interviewers prefacing a question with, "Let me ask you this." (Haha, and they often even say "So let me ask you this.") Just ask the question! The person is being interviewed, for heaven's sake! They expect to be asked questions! Just ask!
"Dad, can I ask you a question?" My response shifts between "yes" and "you just did" depending on how much of a smart ass I'm feeling.
Post by: Paul der Krake on May 07, 2020, 06:52:46 PM
There are no words.
Post by: GreenSheep on May 07, 2020, 07:49:31 PM
Similar to "So..." or maybe a longer form of "so," I've noticed several interviewers prefacing a question with, "Let me ask you this." (Haha, and they often even say "So let me ask you this.") Just ask the question! The person is being interviewed, for heaven's sake! They expect to be asked questions! Just ask!
"Dad, can I ask you a question?" My response shifts between "yes" and "you just did" depending on how much of a smart ass I'm feeling.
Somehow I manage to find this cute/endearing in kids, like they're tentatively trying to broach a difficult subject and are a little unsure of themselves. Maybe that's why it irritates me so much in adults -- just be an adult and spit it out! :-)
Post by: Travis on May 07, 2020, 09:35:52 PM
Similar to "So..." or maybe a longer form of "so," I've noticed several interviewers prefacing a question with, "Let me ask you this." (Haha, and they often even say "So let me ask you this.") Just ask the question! The person is being interviewed, for heaven's sake! They expect to be asked questions! Just ask!
"Dad, can I ask you a question?" My response shifts between "yes" and "you just did" depending on how much of a smart ass I'm feeling.
Somehow I manage to find this cute/endearing in kids, like they're tentatively trying to broach a difficult subject and are a little unsure of themselves. Maybe that's why it irritates me so much in adults -- just be an adult and spit it out! :-)
Agreed. My son is 10 and turns on the snark much more often that I do so I consider him to be an acceptable target. I think I mentioned on this thread months ago that "to be honest" sets me off with adults. People saying it usually mean "I'm being really serious or dramatic to make my point," but I can't help but think "does this mean you weren't honest earlier?"
Post by: GreenSheep on May 08, 2020, 07:08:02 AM
Similar to "So..." or maybe a longer form of "so," I've noticed several interviewers prefacing a question with, "Let me ask you this." (Haha, and they often even say "So let me ask you this.") Just ask the question! The person is being interviewed, for heaven's sake! They expect to be asked questions! Just ask!
"Dad, can I ask you a question?" My response shifts between "yes" and "you just did" depending on how much of a smart ass I'm feeling.
Somehow I manage to find this cute/endearing in kids, like they're tentatively trying to broach a difficult subject and are a little unsure of themselves. Maybe that's why it irritates me so much in adults -- just be an adult and spit it out! :-)
Agreed. My son is 10 and turns on the snark much more often that I do so I consider him to be an acceptable target. I think I mentioned on this thread months ago that "to be honest" sets me off with adults. People saying it usually mean "I'm being really serious or dramatic to make my point," but I can't help but think "does this mean you weren't honest earlier?"
I think that's the right of every dad everywhere. Comes with the dad license. :-) I think this is one of the ways people learn appropriate/efficient use of language. If he gets teased by Dad for this kind of thing, maybe he won't say it in the real world when he grows up.
Yes! When someone says "to be honest" or "truthfully" or "honestly" or (the worst) "notgonnalie," it makes me wonder if they're NOT being honest in every sentence they don't preface with one of those phrases.
Post by: shelivesthedream on May 08, 2020, 07:27:07 AM
Post by: FIRE Artist on May 09, 2020, 09:18:50 PM
It has infected this forum unfortunately. What used to be accepted as a face punch is now being criticized as virtue signalling. Crying “virtue signalling” is a lazy way to approach discourse and usually says more about the person crying it than the person whose opinion they were trying to dismiss. It is a bully tactic.
Guess what? Everything MMM has ever written? Virtue signals. Every single thing everyone ever writes on the internet is a virtue signal. Joining this forum in the first place? Virtue signal.
Looking forward to when this fad passes. Happy to signal my virtue that I find crying virtue signalling boring.
Post by: jinga nation on May 11, 2020, 11:45:35 AM
I wish the phrase "without further adieu" and quick adieu. Used too commonly by many YouTubers and bloggers/vloggers.
https://grammarist.com/phrase/without-further-ado-vs-without-further-adieu/
They state it in the beginning of the video/blog post, so I think they mean "without further ado". However, they pronounce/write it as "adieu".
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 11, 2020, 12:09:33 PM
apologies if it has been stated before by someone.
I wish the phrase "without further adieu" and quick adieu. Used too commonly by many YouTubers and bloggers/vloggers.
https://grammarist.com/phrase/without-further-ado-vs-without-further-adieu/
They state it in the beginning of the video/blog post, so I think they mean "without further ado". However, they pronounce/write it as "adieu".
Aah, the opposite of waala (or whatever weird spelling is floating around out there) when people mean voila.
Post by: nessness on May 11, 2020, 01:53:38 PM
I actually think "Can I ask you a question?" is a great thing for children to learn. Because what it really means is "Is now a good time to ask you a question that might take up a bit of time or should I come back later?" And that's a considerate habit to get into rather than assuming everyone is at your beck and call. I suppose you could teach them to say the long version, but just mocking them for the literal meaning of their polite conversation starter seems silly to me.Agreed. If I call or approach someone at work to have a discussion, I usually start with, "Do you have a few minutes?" I do that because nothing annoys me more than when someone just walks into my cube (pre-quarantine...) and immediately starts explaining a complex situation, and I have to interrupt them to explain that I have to leave for a meeting in 2 minutes.
"Can I ask you a question?" is basically the kids' version of that.
Post by: Chaplin on May 11, 2020, 04:28:58 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on May 11, 2020, 04:47:24 PM
I actually think "Can I ask you a question?" is a great thing for children to learn. Because what it really means is "Is now a good time to ask you a question that might take up a bit of time or should I come back later?" And that's a considerate habit to get into rather than assuming everyone is at your beck and call. I suppose you could teach them to say the long version, but just mocking them for the literal meaning of their polite conversation starter seems silly to me.Agreed. If I call or approach someone at work to have a discussion, I usually start with, "Do you have a few minutes?" I do that because nothing annoys me more than when someone just walks into my cube (pre-quarantine...) and immediately starts explaining a complex situation, and I have to interrupt them to explain that I have to leave for a meeting in 2 minutes.
"Can I ask you a question?" is basically the kids' version of that.
I like that. Very respectful of a person's time, which is always appreciated.
I also like even more specific openers like, "Do you have a few minutes to answer a question about X?" because I get nervous when someone asks if I have time without telling me how they plan to fill that time, so I can't come up with a quick excuse if it's something I don't want to do! :-) Like "Are you busy this weekend?" but for a shorter time frame. No, I don't have a few minutes to fix the printer because everyone seems to think I'm the only person capable of doing it! No, I don't want to help you move all weekend!
Post by: DoubleDown on May 11, 2020, 05:28:19 PM
"the new normal"
+1000
And you can add to that "These uncertain times" and These unprecedented times," especially in relation to trying to sell me something (as in, "In these uncertain times, it's more important than ever to stay connected, so buy Fios for $129.99/month..."
Post by: Travis on May 11, 2020, 05:36:57 PM
apologies if it has been stated before by someone.
I wish the phrase "without further adieu" and quick adieu. Used too commonly by many YouTubers and bloggers/vloggers.
https://grammarist.com/phrase/without-further-ado-vs-without-further-adieu/
They state it in the beginning of the video/blog post, so I think they mean "without further ado". However, they pronounce/write it as "adieu".
Or they use it in the correct spelling and context, but only after talking your ear off. It's supposed to mean "let's keep this short," but I hear it most often as part of the intro to a speech where the intro or the speaker's bio goes five minutes.
Post by: marble_faun on May 12, 2020, 10:30:40 AM
I think it is meant to be a fun/"edgy" mom kind of thing to say, but I truly wince.
Post by: shelivesthedream on May 12, 2020, 12:36:47 PM
When people refer to their children as "assholes."
I think it is meant to be a fun/"edgy" mom kind of thing to say, but I truly wince.
When I want to say ToddlerSLTD is being really really annoying, I whip out my favourite playground insults again. "ToddlerSLTD is being a really stinky pooface today." Somehow the tone seems more appropriate to refer to a small child than "asshole".
Post by: marble_faun on May 14, 2020, 01:41:23 PM
When people refer to their children as "assholes."
I think it is meant to be a fun/"edgy" mom kind of thing to say, but I truly wince.
When I want to say ToddlerSLTD is being really really annoying, I whip out my favourite playground insults again. "ToddlerSLTD is being a really stinky pooface today." Somehow the tone seems more appropriate to refer to a small child than "asshole".
Yeah. To me, "asshole" is the guy in an expensive car who cuts you off in traffic.
For kids, "brat" and "hellion" should suffice.
Post by: slackmax on May 16, 2020, 11:14:33 AM
Watching TV a few days ago, I saw it used in 3 different shows! Ugh....
Post by: Morning Glory on May 16, 2020, 01:32:38 PM
'You got this.' 'I got this.' 'We got this.'
Watching TV a few days ago, I saw it used in 3 different shows! Ugh....
"I got this" was my son's favorite phrase when he was three, so I have fond memories of it. He must have gotten it from a cartoon.
I have found myself using the toddler style insults to refer to adults e.g. "(patient with behaviors) is being a butthead" or "a and b refused their hep B vaccines, those dum dums are going to cause an outbreak"
Post by: frugalnacho on May 19, 2020, 12:12:31 PM
'You got this.' 'I got this.' 'We got this.'
Watching TV a few days ago, I saw it used in 3 different shows! Ugh....
"I got this" was my son's favorite phrase when he was three, so I have fond memories of it. He must have gotten it from a cartoon.
I have found myself using the toddler style insults to refer to adults e.g. "(patient with behaviors) is being a butthead" or "a and b refused their hep B vaccines, those dum dums are going to cause an outbreak"
Haha my 2 year old son also says "I got this" and it cracks me up. I also don't know where he picked it up. He uses it so matter of factly too. Do you need me to help you ____? No, I got this.
Post by: shelivesthedream on May 19, 2020, 02:30:02 PM
Post by: teen persuasion on May 20, 2020, 06:49:00 PM
The verb is "jump", not "rope". So it should be jumping-rope.
Post by: mrmoonymartian on May 22, 2020, 11:19:32 PM
'You got this.' 'I got this.' 'We got this.'But you can just train yourself to mentally insert the 've like they mumbled it or another noise drowned it out. IRL it's often hard to hear every bit of every word properly, so it should be an easy fix. You got this.
Watching TV a few days ago, I saw it used in 3 different shows! Ugh....
Post by: mrmoonymartian on May 22, 2020, 11:44:17 PM
Virtue signalling.I agree. Directly or indirectly bragging about good deeds produces the necessary cognitive and social rewards for practicing pro-social behaviour. If everyone did good entirely for its own sake - in complete anonymity - there would be a lot less good done in the world.
It has infected this forum unfortunately. What used to be accepted as a face punch is now being criticized as virtue signalling. Crying “virtue signalling” is a lazy way to approach discourse and usually says more about the person crying it than the person whose opinion they were trying to dismiss. It is a bully tactic.
Guess what? Everything MMM has ever written? Virtue signals. Every single thing everyone ever writes on the internet is a virtue signal. Joining this forum in the first place? Virtue signal.
Looking forward to when this fad passes. Happy to signal my virtue that I find crying virtue signalling boring.
Is that what anti-signallers really want? Fewer good deeds done by others so that they don't have to feel bad for being selfish all the time? For shame.
Post by: shelivesthedream on May 24, 2020, 01:56:20 PM
Virtue signalling.I agree. Directly or indirectly bragging about good deeds produces the necessary cognitive and social rewards for practicing pro-social behaviour. If everyone did good entirely for its own sake - in complete anonymity - there would be a lot less good done in the world.
It has infected this forum unfortunately. What used to be accepted as a face punch is now being criticized as virtue signalling. Crying “virtue signalling” is a lazy way to approach discourse and usually says more about the person crying it than the person whose opinion they were trying to dismiss. It is a bully tactic.
Guess what? Everything MMM has ever written? Virtue signals. Every single thing everyone ever writes on the internet is a virtue signal. Joining this forum in the first place? Virtue signal.
Looking forward to when this fad passes. Happy to signal my virtue that I find crying virtue signalling boring.
Is that what anti-signallers really want? Fewer good deeds done by others so that they don't have to feel bad for being selfish all the time? For shame.
I understood "virtue signalling" to not mean ostentatiously doing good deeds, but rather doing things which signal what a good person you are but are ineffective compared to similar but less obvious actions. Buying an obviously electric car vs just not driving very much. Have I misunderstood?
Post by: mrmoonymartian on May 24, 2020, 04:12:37 PM
According to wikipedia, virtue signalling is a pejorative phrase for the conspicuous expression of moral values. A public act that is intended to inform others of one's socially acceptable alignment on an issue.Virtue signalling.I agree. Directly or indirectly bragging about good deeds produces the necessary cognitive and social rewards for practicing pro-social behaviour. If everyone did good entirely for its own sake - in complete anonymity - there would be a lot less good done in the world.
It has infected this forum unfortunately. What used to be accepted as a face punch is now being criticized as virtue signalling. Crying “virtue signalling” is a lazy way to approach discourse and usually says more about the person crying it than the person whose opinion they were trying to dismiss. It is a bully tactic.
Guess what? Everything MMM has ever written? Virtue signals. Every single thing everyone ever writes on the internet is a virtue signal. Joining this forum in the first place? Virtue signal.
Looking forward to when this fad passes. Happy to signal my virtue that I find crying virtue signalling boring.
Is that what anti-signallers really want? Fewer good deeds done by others so that they don't have to feel bad for being selfish all the time? For shame.
I understood "virtue signalling" to not mean ostentatiously doing good deeds, but rather doing things which signal what a good person you are but are ineffective compared to similar but less obvious actions. Buying an obviously electric car vs just not driving very much. Have I misunderstood?
Post by: FIRE Artist on May 25, 2020, 07:20:28 PM
According to wikipedia, virtue signalling is a pejorative phrase for the conspicuous expression of moral values. A public act that is intended to inform others of one's socially acceptable alignment on an issue.Virtue signalling.I agree. Directly or indirectly bragging about good deeds produces the necessary cognitive and social rewards for practicing pro-social behaviour. If everyone did good entirely for its own sake - in complete anonymity - there would be a lot less good done in the world.
It has infected this forum unfortunately. What used to be accepted as a face punch is now being criticized as virtue signalling. Crying “virtue signalling” is a lazy way to approach discourse and usually says more about the person crying it than the person whose opinion they were trying to dismiss. It is a bully tactic.
Guess what? Everything MMM has ever written? Virtue signals. Every single thing everyone ever writes on the internet is a virtue signal. Joining this forum in the first place? Virtue signal.
Looking forward to when this fad passes. Happy to signal my virtue that I find crying virtue signalling boring.
Is that what anti-signallers really want? Fewer good deeds done by others so that they don't have to feel bad for being selfish all the time? For shame.
I understood "virtue signalling" to not mean ostentatiously doing good deeds, but rather doing things which signal what a good person you are but are ineffective compared to similar but less obvious actions. Buying an obviously electric car vs just not driving very much. Have I misunderstood?
This is how I understand it as well. It is also about signalling alignment with a specific sub group of people...like MMM followers are a sub group, we signal our shared virtue by belonging to this forum, and we also signal it any time we ever tell anyone about our frugality. Virtue signalling is a way to find your tribe...kinda like back in university, you would look at people’s CD collections to see if they liked the same kind of music as you did.
My biggest issue with this term is that it is more and more used as a way to dismiss and shut down dialog. It usually plays out this way - Person A makes a statement that aligns with their value system - let’s use the example of someone who shares that they are a vegetarian because it is better for the environment, and they willingly put the environment ahead of their carnivorous instincts. Person B is someone who likes to eat beef, and would never ever give it up. Like the majority of people, Person B will usually take Person A’s statement as a personal attack (usually it isn’t a personal attack, but we all seem to think everything written on the internet is all about us as individuals). So Person B feels butt hurt about Person A’s statement, and instead of engaging in a dialog, or heaven forbid, expand their understanding of a differing point of view, they will shut down the dialog by accusing Person A of the evil “virtue signalling”. It really is strange to watch it catch on.
Post by: solon on May 25, 2020, 08:54:20 PM
According to wikipedia, virtue signalling is a pejorative phrase for the conspicuous expression of moral values. A public act that is intended to inform others of one's socially acceptable alignment on an issue.Virtue signalling.I agree. Directly or indirectly bragging about good deeds produces the necessary cognitive and social rewards for practicing pro-social behaviour. If everyone did good entirely for its own sake - in complete anonymity - there would be a lot less good done in the world.
It has infected this forum unfortunately. What used to be accepted as a face punch is now being criticized as virtue signalling. Crying “virtue signalling” is a lazy way to approach discourse and usually says more about the person crying it than the person whose opinion they were trying to dismiss. It is a bully tactic.
Guess what? Everything MMM has ever written? Virtue signals. Every single thing everyone ever writes on the internet is a virtue signal. Joining this forum in the first place? Virtue signal.
Looking forward to when this fad passes. Happy to signal my virtue that I find crying virtue signalling boring.
Is that what anti-signallers really want? Fewer good deeds done by others so that they don't have to feel bad for being selfish all the time? For shame.
I understood "virtue signalling" to not mean ostentatiously doing good deeds, but rather doing things which signal what a good person you are but are ineffective compared to similar but less obvious actions. Buying an obviously electric car vs just not driving very much. Have I misunderstood?
This is how I understand it as well. It is also about signalling alignment with a specific sub group of people...like MMM followers are a sub group, we signal our shared virtue by belonging to this forum, and we also signal it any time we ever tell anyone about our frugality. Virtue signalling is a way to find your tribe...kinda like back in university, you would look at people’s CD collections to see if they liked the same kind of music as you did.
My biggest issue with this term is that it is more and more used as a way to dismiss and shut down dialog. It usually plays out this way - Person A makes a statement that aligns with their value system - let’s use the example of someone who shares that they are a vegetarian because it is better for the environment, and they willingly put the environment ahead of their carnivorous instincts. Person B is someone who likes to eat beef, and would never ever give it up. Like the majority of people, Person B will usually take Person A’s statement as a personal attack (usually it isn’t a personal attack, but we all seem to think everything written on the internet is all about us as individuals). So Person B feels butt hurt about Person A’s statement, and instead of engaging in a dialog, or heaven forbid, expand their understanding of a differing point of view, they will shut down the dialog by accusing Person A of the evil “virtue signalling”. It really is strange to watch it catch on.
So, how long have you been a vegetarian?
Post by: Travis on May 25, 2020, 09:24:12 PM
According to wikipedia, virtue signalling is a pejorative phrase for the conspicuous expression of moral values. A public act that is intended to inform others of one's socially acceptable alignment on an issue.Virtue signalling.I agree. Directly or indirectly bragging about good deeds produces the necessary cognitive and social rewards for practicing pro-social behaviour. If everyone did good entirely for its own sake - in complete anonymity - there would be a lot less good done in the world.
It has infected this forum unfortunately. What used to be accepted as a face punch is now being criticized as virtue signalling. Crying “virtue signalling” is a lazy way to approach discourse and usually says more about the person crying it than the person whose opinion they were trying to dismiss. It is a bully tactic.
Guess what? Everything MMM has ever written? Virtue signals. Every single thing everyone ever writes on the internet is a virtue signal. Joining this forum in the first place? Virtue signal.
Looking forward to when this fad passes. Happy to signal my virtue that I find crying virtue signalling boring.
Is that what anti-signallers really want? Fewer good deeds done by others so that they don't have to feel bad for being selfish all the time? For shame.
I understood "virtue signalling" to not mean ostentatiously doing good deeds, but rather doing things which signal what a good person you are but are ineffective compared to similar but less obvious actions. Buying an obviously electric car vs just not driving very much. Have I misunderstood?
This is how I understand it as well. It is also about signalling alignment with a specific sub group of people...like MMM followers are a sub group, we signal our shared virtue by belonging to this forum, and we also signal it any time we ever tell anyone about our frugality. Virtue signalling is a way to find your tribe...kinda like back in university, you would look at people’s CD collections to see if they liked the same kind of music as you did.
My biggest issue with this term is that it is more and more used as a way to dismiss and shut down dialog. It usually plays out this way - Person A makes a statement that aligns with their value system - let’s use the example of someone who shares that they are a vegetarian because it is better for the environment, and they willingly put the environment ahead of their carnivorous instincts. Person B is someone who likes to eat beef, and would never ever give it up. Like the majority of people, Person B will usually take Person A’s statement as a personal attack (usually it isn’t a personal attack, but we all seem to think everything written on the internet is all about us as individuals). So Person B feels butt hurt about Person A’s statement, and instead of engaging in a dialog, or heaven forbid, expand their understanding of a differing point of view, they will shut down the dialog by accusing Person A of the evil “virtue signalling”. It really is strange to watch it catch on.
So, how long have you been a vegetarian?
And why do you feel the need to tell the rest of us? Can't you just be a quiet vegetarian?
Post by: mrmoonymartian on May 26, 2020, 01:53:41 AM
Funnily enough, I also put the envirusment ahead of my coronavirus instincts. Interesting.According to wikipedia, virtue signalling is a pejorative phrase for the conspicuous expression of moral values. A public act that is intended to inform others of one's socially acceptable alignment on an issue.Virtue signalling.I agree. Directly or indirectly bragging about good deeds produces the necessary cognitive and social rewards for practicing pro-social behaviour. If everyone did good entirely for its own sake - in complete anonymity - there would be a lot less good done in the world.
It has infected this forum unfortunately. What used to be accepted as a face punch is now being criticized as virtue signalling. Crying “virtue signalling” is a lazy way to approach discourse and usually says more about the person crying it than the person whose opinion they were trying to dismiss. It is a bully tactic.
Guess what? Everything MMM has ever written? Virtue signals. Every single thing everyone ever writes on the internet is a virtue signal. Joining this forum in the first place? Virtue signal.
Looking forward to when this fad passes. Happy to signal my virtue that I find crying virtue signalling boring.
Is that what anti-signallers really want? Fewer good deeds done by others so that they don't have to feel bad for being selfish all the time? For shame.
I understood "virtue signalling" to not mean ostentatiously doing good deeds, but rather doing things which signal what a good person you are but are ineffective compared to similar but less obvious actions. Buying an obviously electric car vs just not driving very much. Have I misunderstood?
This is how I understand it as well. It is also about signalling alignment with a specific sub group of people...like MMM followers are a sub group, we signal our shared virtue by belonging to this forum, and we also signal it any time we ever tell anyone about our frugality. Virtue signalling is a way to find your tribe...kinda like back in university, you would look at people’s CD collections to see if they liked the same kind of music as you did.
My biggest issue with this term is that it is more and more used as a way to dismiss and shut down dialog. It usually plays out this way - Person A makes a statement that aligns with their value system - let’s use the example of someone who shares that they are a vegetarian because it is better for the environment, and they willingly put the environment ahead of their carnivorous instincts. Person B is someone who likes to eat beef, and would never ever give it up. Like the majority of people, Person B will usually take Person A’s statement as a personal attack (usually it isn’t a personal attack, but we all seem to think everything written on the internet is all about us as individuals). So Person B feels butt hurt about Person A’s statement, and instead of engaging in a dialog, or heaven forbid, expand their understanding of a differing point of view, they will shut down the dialog by accusing Person A of the evil “virtue signalling”. It really is strange to watch it catch on.
So, how long have you been a vegetarian?
And why do you feel the need to tell the rest of us? Can't you just be a quiet vegetarian?
Post by: marble_faun on May 26, 2020, 08:48:57 AM
Post by: Kris on May 26, 2020, 10:10:24 AM
Often people who use the phrase "virtue signalling" seem to think that others don't sincerely hold moral or ethical beliefs. The idea seems to be that taking a public stance on an issue (particularly those things flagged as "social justice" issues) is just a performance staged for brownie points.
For this reason, I consider people who use the phrase "virtue signaling" to be engaging in an ad hominem fallacy.
Not to mention, accusing someone of "virtue signaling" is a form of virtue signaling in itself.
Post by: frugalnacho on May 26, 2020, 10:22:21 AM
Post by: jambongris on May 26, 2020, 10:37:42 AM
Post by: FIRE Artist on May 26, 2020, 02:52:19 PM
According to wikipedia, virtue signalling is a pejorative phrase for the conspicuous expression of moral values. A public act that is intended to inform others of one's socially acceptable alignment on an issue.Virtue signalling.I agree. Directly or indirectly bragging about good deeds produces the necessary cognitive and social rewards for practicing pro-social behaviour. If everyone did good entirely for its own sake - in complete anonymity - there would be a lot less good done in the world.
It has infected this forum unfortunately. What used to be accepted as a face punch is now being criticized as virtue signalling. Crying “virtue signalling” is a lazy way to approach discourse and usually says more about the person crying it than the person whose opinion they were trying to dismiss. It is a bully tactic.
Guess what? Everything MMM has ever written? Virtue signals. Every single thing everyone ever writes on the internet is a virtue signal. Joining this forum in the first place? Virtue signal.
Looking forward to when this fad passes. Happy to signal my virtue that I find crying virtue signalling boring.
Is that what anti-signallers really want? Fewer good deeds done by others so that they don't have to feel bad for being selfish all the time? For shame.
I understood "virtue signalling" to not mean ostentatiously doing good deeds, but rather doing things which signal what a good person you are but are ineffective compared to similar but less obvious actions. Buying an obviously electric car vs just not driving very much. Have I misunderstood?
This is how I understand it as well. It is also about signalling alignment with a specific sub group of people...like MMM followers are a sub group, we signal our shared virtue by belonging to this forum, and we also signal it any time we ever tell anyone about our frugality. Virtue signalling is a way to find your tribe...kinda like back in university, you would look at people’s CD collections to see if they liked the same kind of music as you did.
My biggest issue with this term is that it is more and more used as a way to dismiss and shut down dialog. It usually plays out this way - Person A makes a statement that aligns with their value system - let’s use the example of someone who shares that they are a vegetarian because it is better for the environment, and they willingly put the environment ahead of their carnivorous instincts. Person B is someone who likes to eat beef, and would never ever give it up. Like the majority of people, Person B will usually take Person A’s statement as a personal attack (usually it isn’t a personal attack, but we all seem to think everything written on the internet is all about us as individuals). So Person B feels butt hurt about Person A’s statement, and instead of engaging in a dialog, or heaven forbid, expand their understanding of a differing point of view, they will shut down the dialog by accusing Person A of the evil “virtue signalling”. It really is strange to watch it catch on.
So, how long have you been a vegetarian?
And why do you feel the need to tell the rest of us? Can't you just be a quiet vegetarian?
I am going to give you both the benefit of assuming you are joking.
This does highlight another problem with the whole “Virtue signalling” thing, people who claim it will often jump to conclusions about someone’s intent, and assuming veiled meaning where there probably isn’t one.
I personally am not a vegetarian, but I don’t usually feel butt hurt when someone else tells me they are one either.
Post by: FIRE Artist on May 26, 2020, 03:00:06 PM
Is a lack of virtue signalling considered the new virtue signalling?
Is that kind of like how atheism is actually a religion?
Post by: FIRE Artist on May 26, 2020, 03:18:05 PM
Often people who use the phrase "virtue signalling" seem to think that others don't sincerely hold moral or ethical beliefs. The idea seems to be that taking a public stance on an issue (particularly those things flagged as "social justice" issues) is just a performance staged for brownie points.
For this reason, I consider people who use the phrase "virtue signaling" to be engaging in an ad hominem fallacy.
Not to mention, accusing someone of "virtue signaling" is a form of virtue signaling in itself.
That is a very succinct way to describe why I dislike this term so much. Thank you!
It really is a form of personal attack isn’t it? If that were accepted to be true, accusing someone of virtue signalling goes against the rules of most forums that I am a part of.
Post by: Travis on May 26, 2020, 06:33:09 PM
Often people who use the phrase "virtue signalling" seem to think that others don't sincerely hold moral or ethical beliefs. The idea seems to be that taking a public stance on an issue (particularly those things flagged as "social justice" issues) is just a performance staged for brownie points.
For this reason, I consider people who use the phrase "virtue signaling" to be engaging in an ad hominem fallacy.
Not to mention, accusing someone of "virtue signaling" is a form of virtue signaling in itself.
That is a very succinct way to describe why I dislike this term so much. Thank you!
It really is a form of personal attack isn’t it? If that were accepted to be true, accusing someone of virtue signalling goes against the rules of most forums that I am a part of.
Yes we were joking. Thank you for seeing it.
Calling someone out for virtue signaling as your go-to response just means you don't have anything useful to say in response.
Do I think some people highlight their actions to win some kind of "I'm better than you" competition? Absolutely. Usually they're pretty clear about that intention though. I don't begrudge somebody for being proud of doing something they think was a good thing and sharing that news.
Post by: Bloop Bloop on May 28, 2020, 05:22:29 PM
Often people who use the phrase "virtue signalling" seem to think that others don't sincerely hold moral or ethical beliefs. The idea seems to be that taking a public stance on an issue (particularly those things flagged as "social justice" issues) is just a performance staged for brownie points.
For this reason, I consider people who use the phrase "virtue signaling" to be engaging in an ad hominem fallacy.
Not to mention, accusing someone of "virtue signaling" is a form of virtue signaling in itself.
That is a very succinct way to describe why I dislike this term so much. Thank you!
It really is a form of personal attack isn’t it? If that were accepted to be true, accusing someone of virtue signalling goes against the rules of most forums that I am a part of.
I think the reason people react to displays of virtue and call it "virtue signalling" is because it can often be tone deaf.
To me, saying something like "I am vegetarian because I think it's a more ethical choice" is a perfectly fine, in fact unimpeachable, proposition. But saying something like "I wish everyone could be vegetarian" strikes me as tone deaf because it is often harder or more expensive to live a healthy vegetarian lifestyle, or at the very least it takes some knowledge and getting used to.
Vegetarianism is a bad example maybe because it's something that I think is universally difficult to criticise. But with other things like electric vehicles and bicycling to work etc I can see a much easier counter-argument. Not everyone is lucky enough to live within biking range to work and not everyone has the physical capacity or energy to bike a long commute. Likewise, many EVs are just more expensive than the rest. So people saying tone deaf and smug things about biking to work, etc, can rub a lot of people up the wrong way.
Post by: js82 on May 29, 2020, 05:10:42 AM
Often people who use the phrase "virtue signalling" seem to think that others don't sincerely hold moral or ethical beliefs. The idea seems to be that taking a public stance on an issue (particularly those things flagged as "social justice" issues) is just a performance staged for brownie points.
To me, what defines "virtue signaling" is the intent - asserting one's beliefs for the sake of tribal identification without the expectation of creating change is virtue signaling. Attempting to create change is not, as the primary purpose is more than to "signal". To that end: Almost all bumper stickers(except for the ones that are just intended to be funny) are some form of virtue signaling. Most things more consequential than a bumper sticker you can't really render a judgement without knowing someone's intent(was the fact that it's an EV a factor in someone's decision to buy a Tesla, or was it just a great car according to their personal criteria? You don't know without being inside their head).
Commonly, those who decry others as "virtue signalling" tend to be of a certain political persuasion(See Kris' comment about how accusing others of virtue signaling can, in itself be a form of virtue signaling). However both ends of the political spectrum engage in it - however the conservative and liberal "flavors" of it look very different.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on May 29, 2020, 08:33:23 AM
I think the reason people react to displays of virtue and call it "virtue signalling" is because it can often be tone deaf.This is fascinating to me, because I had exactly the opposite reaction as you did to those two phrasings. My instinctive reaction to "More ethical choice" is that the phrase implies that the speaker is morally superior to the listener, while "I wish everyone could be vegetarian" strikes me as more of an invitation to share the happiness the speaker gets from being vegetarian.
To me, saying something like "I am vegetarian because I think it's a more ethical choice" is a perfectly fine, in fact unimpeachable, proposition. But saying something like "I wish everyone could be vegetarian" strikes me as tone deaf because it is often harder or more expensive to live a healthy vegetarian lifestyle, or at the very least it takes some knowledge and getting used to.
I'm not saying that my interpretation is right and you're wrong, I'm just intrigued by the fact that there's such a disparity of reaction.
Post by: bluebelle on May 29, 2020, 09:21:25 AM
Post by: mrmoonymartian on May 29, 2020, 10:19:06 AM
I think the reason people react to displays of virtue and call it "virtue signalling" is because it can often be tone deaf.This is fascinating to me, because I had exactly the opposite reaction as you did to those two phrasings. My instinctive reaction to "More ethical choice" is that the phrase implies that the speaker is morally superior to the listener, while "I wish everyone could be vegetarian" strikes me as more of an invitation to share the happiness the speaker gets from being vegetarian.
To me, saying something like "I am vegetarian because I think it's a more ethical choice" is a perfectly fine, in fact unimpeachable, proposition. But saying something like "I wish everyone could be vegetarian" strikes me as tone deaf because it is often harder or more expensive to live a healthy vegetarian lifestyle, or at the very least it takes some knowledge and getting used to.
I'm not saying that my interpretation is right and you're wrong, I'm just intrigued by the fact that there's such a disparity of reaction.
The statement "I wish everyone could be vegetarian", though clear, is ambiguous in this internet age where precise communication is infrequently encountered.
The literal interpretation is that it is a statement of one's desire for a possibility to exist. It makes no comment on whether the speaker also desires for the possibility to be realised. If they had said "I wish everyone (would be/were/became) vegetarian", then that would be a much stronger position worthy of debate. As it stands, they appear to be claiming that not everyone can be, but they would like everyone to have that option. If they already thought that everyone could be, then continuing to wish for that possibility would be redundant/nonsensical. So if they are logical enough to have this meaningful conversation, which they are, then they mustn't think everyone could be. Their motive for wishing for everyone to have the option to be vegetarian remains unknown.
You could argue that they meant more than the literal interpretation, or that their motive could somehow be divined. That is possible, but remains unsupported without further information. Otherwise whatever is ascribed beyond the most basic interpretation is at best a random guess, and at worst a biased projection.
"There is nothing outside the text" - Jacques Derrida
Post by: Morning Glory on May 29, 2020, 12:28:22 PM
Post by: shelivesthedream on May 29, 2020, 01:32:29 PM
The topic of vegetarians has made me think about how I hate the term "plant based" because it is so misleading. When I see it I think it should mean a Micheal Pollan/ flexitarian/ mostly plants diet, but instead people have started saying"plant based" to mean "vegan".
Agree. Plant-based diet = flexitarianish. Vegan = ...plant diet, I guess!
Post by: GreenSheep on May 29, 2020, 05:57:19 PM
The topic of vegetarians has made me think about how I hate the term "plant based" because it is so misleading. When I see it I think it should mean a Micheal Pollan/ flexitarian/ mostly plants diet, but instead people have started saying"plant based" to mean "vegan".
Agree. Plant-based diet = flexitarianish. Vegan = ...plant diet, I guess!
This drives me nuts, too. I am technically vegan, but I hate that word because it's so ethically/morally charged, and I don't want to give the impression that I think I'm better than anyone, or judging anyone, by being vegan. Also, I do it for my health, and just any old vegan diet is not necessarily healthy.
Fries and a Coke are vegan. There are vegan burgers that are nearly as unhealthy as cow burgers. There's vegan ice cream. Donuts. Any junk you want is out there somewhere in vegan form. "Whole food plant based" sort of captures it, but that still leaves room for some things that don't come from plants, and you also get people who want to split hairs about what, exactly, is a whole food. And there are even a handful of plant foods that I don't eat.
Really, the best thing would be if we could all just do away with these labels. It's so rude to look down your nose at someone while they're eating and ask, "So... what ARE you? Vegan or something?" I'm not the vegan who announces my "status" to the whole table, but people notice, and then they want to know what box to put me in. It really doesn't matter unless you're cooking for me.
Post by: imadandylion on June 04, 2020, 04:31:33 PM
"the new normal"
Glad I'm not the only one. It's like during the 2008 recession when people were constantly saying, "in this economy."
Also, I hate, "triggered." People don't know what it means, then use it in instances where someone disagrees with them and because they deem them to be too passionate, they must be "triggered."
And since I'm here, "Everything in moderation." Literally no one understands what that is. Usually meant to make people feel better about themselves for eating junk food, sweets, fast food, or other unhealthy indulgences multiple times a week.
Post by: GreenSheep on June 05, 2020, 06:59:22 AM
"the new normal"
Glad I'm not the only one. It's like during the 2008 recession when people were constantly saying, "in this economy."
Also, I hate, "triggered." People don't know what it means, then use it in instances where someone disagrees with them and because they deem them to be too passionate, they must be "triggered."
And since I'm here, "Everything in moderation." Literally no one understands what that is. Usually meant to make people feel better about themselves for eating junk food, sweets, fast food, or other unhealthy indulgences multiple times a week.
I agree with all of these. As for "moderation," I heard a good take on that recently. Someone said that bad things should be minimized, not moderated, and GOOD things should be done in moderation rather than in excess. "Moderation" of heroin, for example, is a terrible idea. But exercising or eating kale or spending time with your children... those are all great things that people should do, but they shouldn't do any of them 24 hours a day. You don't want to hurt yourself over-exercising, you can't get enough calories eating only kale, and your children need to learn to spend time with other people sometimes. So... moderation for good things, but not for bad things.
Post by: mrmoonymartian on June 05, 2020, 08:04:58 AM
If it is good, then it should be done in moderation."the new normal"
Glad I'm not the only one. It's like during the 2008 recession when people were constantly saying, "in this economy."
Also, I hate, "triggered." People don't know what it means, then use it in instances where someone disagrees with them and because they deem them to be too passionate, they must be "triggered."
And since I'm here, "Everything in moderation." Literally no one understands what that is. Usually meant to make people feel better about themselves for eating junk food, sweets, fast food, or other unhealthy indulgences multiple times a week.
I agree with all of these. As for "moderation," I heard a good take on that recently. Someone said that bad things should be minimized, not moderated, and GOOD things should be done in moderation rather than in excess. "Moderation" of heroin, for example, is a terrible idea. But exercising or eating kale or spending time with your children... those are all great things that people should do, but they shouldn't do any of them 24 hours a day. You don't want to hurt yourself over-exercising, you can't get enough calories eating only kale, and your children need to learn to spend time with other people sometimes. So... moderation for good things, but not for bad things.
Doing good things in moderation is good.
Therefore doing good things in moderation should be done in moderation.
Post by: Dicey on June 05, 2020, 12:09:15 PM
If it is good, then it should be done in moderation."the new normal"
Glad I'm not the only one. It's like during the 2008 recession when people were constantly saying, "in this economy."
Also, I hate, "triggered." People don't know what it means, then use it in instances where someone disagrees with them and because they deem them to be too passionate, they must be "triggered."
And since I'm here, "Everything in moderation." Literally no one understands what that is. Usually meant to make people feel better about themselves for eating junk food, sweets, fast food, or other unhealthy indulgences multiple times a week.
I agree with all of these. As for "moderation," I heard a good take on that recently. Someone said that bad things should be minimized, not moderated, and GOOD things should be done in moderation rather than in excess. "Moderation" of heroin, for example, is a terrible idea. But exercising or eating kale or spending time with your children... those are all great things that people should do, but they shouldn't do any of them 24 hours a day. You don't want to hurt yourself over-exercising, you can't get enough calories eating only kale, and your children need to learn to spend time with other people sometimes. So... moderation for good things, but not for bad things.
Doing good things in moderation is good.
Therefore doing good things in moderation should be done in moderation.
Heh heh, I like the way you think.
Post by: GreenSheep on June 07, 2020, 07:38:06 AM
Also, I came across this article that might interest those who are following this thread. Uptalk drives me insane, but I do have to acknowledge that I say "I mean" and "you know" entirely too often. Since reading this article, I've really been working on monitoring and adjusting my speech patterns!
https://www.debbiegrattan.com/blog/the-most-annoying-speech-patterns-you-hear-all-the-time-now/
Post by: zolotiyeruki on June 07, 2020, 10:26:53 AM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 07, 2020, 11:18:21 AM
Post by: robartsd on June 08, 2020, 09:43:14 AM
Looking at article headings online: "female this" but "man that", both from the same news source. Be consistent. She is a woman or he is a male. I prefer woman and man to female and male, because female/male could be any species, woman/man identifies them as people Obviously the female is a human, but it grates.Unless they were unsure of the female's age but sure that the man is an adult. I doubt that this was the case in your example and of course there isn't really a good reason not to use "young woman" or "young man" for someone who is at least a teen but may not yet be an adult.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 08, 2020, 12:05:14 PM
Looking at article headings online: "female this" but "man that", both from the same news source. Be consistent. She is a woman or he is a male. I prefer woman and man to female and male, because female/male could be any species, woman/man identifies them as people Obviously the female is a human, but it grates.Unless they were unsure of the female's age but sure that the man is an adult. I doubt that this was the case in your example and of course there isn't really a good reason not to use "young woman" or "young man" for someone who is at least a teen but may not yet be an adult.
The accompanying photo was of a woman in her 20s/30s. The man also looked like 20s/30s.
I see this regularly. It just hit me harder this time because they were side by side. It doesn't happen all the time but it happens a lot. Start watching for it.
Post by: Proud Foot on June 08, 2020, 01:36:09 PM
This might be a controversial one, but I'm tired of COVID platitudes like "We're all in this together." No we're not. The political divide remains huge, the experiences of wealthy and poor through this are quite different, and everyone is having their own experience and reaction. The phrase just seems delusional, or just condescending at best.
Finally catching up on this thread and I completely agree with this! We have been watching more TV as a result of all of this and my wife and I are so tired of the commercials with celebrities* talking about how we need to stay home so things will be better and we are all in it together. Not all of us are experiencing it the same or having the same reactions. I definitely felt like it was condescending coming from people who, in my opinion, would not have experienced the struggles felt by many across the country.
* I assumed they were all celebrities because the few I recognized are celebrities and networks like to use celebrities for situations like this.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 08, 2020, 02:57:29 PM
This might be a controversial one, but I'm tired of COVID platitudes like "We're all in this together." No we're not. The political divide remains huge, the experiences of wealthy and poor through this are quite different, and everyone is having their own experience and reaction. The phrase just seems delusional, or just condescending at best.
Finally catching up on this thread and I completely agree with this! We have been watching more TV as a result of all of this and my wife and I are so tired of the commercials with celebrities* talking about how we need to stay home so things will be better and we are all in it together. Not all of us are experiencing it the same or having the same reactions. I definitely felt like it was condescending coming from people who, in my opinion, would not have experienced the struggles felt by many across the country.
* I assumed they were all celebrities because the few I recognized are celebrities and networks like to use celebrities for situations like this.
That actually works in some countries. New Zealand has done wonderfully well and their Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, has repeatedly said (I paraphrase) that "we are all this together and need to help each other".
Post by: solon on June 08, 2020, 02:59:01 PM
https://www.getrichslowly.org/saving-rate-vs-savings-rate/
I never really thought of the difference before, but he is absolutely right. It will bug me now that I know, seeing it misused everywhere.
Post by: Freedomin5 on June 10, 2020, 02:28:57 PM
It’s not “Do Yourself It”, folks...it’s Do It Yourself (DIY).
Maybe they’re getting it mixed up with FYI?
Post by: Dee on June 15, 2020, 06:34:46 AM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on June 18, 2020, 06:56:43 AM
Post by: merula on June 18, 2020, 07:45:08 AM
"At a high rate of speed" - it's ... well, "redundant" doesn't sound quite right, but it's the closest I can get. "At high speed" is a much more correct term.
Technically, a "rate of speed" is acceleration, the rate at which a speed is changing.
Though even more correctly, as acceleration is a vector quantity, one shouldn't reflect acceleration without direction, which would make it a rate of velocity.
Post by: solon on June 18, 2020, 10:54:24 AM
"At a high rate of speed" - it's ... well, "redundant" doesn't sound quite right, but it's the closest I can get. "At high speed" is a much more correct term.
I think what you're saying is speed IS a rate. So yes, "rate of speed" is redundant.
Post by: DoubleDown on June 18, 2020, 12:40:23 PM
"At this point" or "at this time" each work. Using both (redundantly) seems to me to be used almost exclusively by government people hoping to look important when giving news briefings. It's part of bureaucrat-speak I guess.
Post by: Travis on June 18, 2020, 05:06:00 PM
"At a high rate of speed" - it's ... well, "redundant" doesn't sound quite right, but it's the closest I can get. "At high speed" is a much more correct term.
Technically, a "rate of speed" is acceleration, the rate at which a speed is changing.
Though even more correctly, as acceleration is a vector quantity, one shouldn't reflect acceleration without direction, which would make it a rate of velocity.
Saying "rate" sounds more official; however, if they use "velocity," then people will tilt their heads and give you that puppy dog stare.
Post by: GreenSheep on June 26, 2020, 07:08:03 AM
Orchard apples (Do they grow any other way, commercially?)
Crisp apples
Warming cinnamon
Fresh lettuce (Well, I would hope so.)
Spicy ginger
Buttery pecans
Sometimes it's okay to let the ingredient speak for itself.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 26, 2020, 07:13:03 AM
Restaurant menu writers, food bloggers, etc.: Not every ingredient requires an adjective before it, especially if it doesn't add anything new to the average person's general concept of that particular ingredient. If you're doing something special to it, for example to make a non-crispy thing crispy, then that might be useful information. Also, each ingredient seems to have a list of 3-4 adjectives from which each writer chooses.
Orchard apples (Do they grow any other way, commercially?)
Crisp apples
Warming cinnamon
Fresh lettuce (Well, I would hope so.)
Spicy ginger
Buttery pecans
Sometimes it's okay to let the ingredient speak for itself.
I read someplace that people are willing to pay higher prices with these fancy descriptions. So it is marketing, pure and simple.
Post by: Dicey on June 26, 2020, 07:28:32 AM
This might bug me, too. Solution: make your own delicious food. Boom! No menu reading required. As for food blogs, I always skip the blah, blah, blah, and head straight to the recipe.Restaurant menu writers, food bloggers, etc.: Not every ingredient requires an adjective before it, especially if it doesn't add anything new to the average person's general concept of that particular ingredient. If you're doing something special to it, for example to make a non-crispy thing crispy, then that might be useful information. Also, each ingredient seems to have a list of 3-4 adjectives from which each writer chooses.
Orchard apples (Do they grow any other way, commercially?)
Crisp apples
Warming cinnamon
Fresh lettuce (Well, I would hope so.)
Spicy ginger
Buttery pecans
Sometimes it's okay to let the ingredient speak for itself.
I read someplace that people are willing to pay higher prices with these fancy descriptions. So it is marketing, pure and simple.
Post by: GreenSheep on June 26, 2020, 11:14:11 AM
This might bug me, too. Solution: make your own delicious food. Boom! No menu reading required. As for food blogs, I always skip the blah, blah, blah, and head straight to the recipe.Restaurant menu writers, food bloggers, etc.: Not every ingredient requires an adjective before it, especially if it doesn't add anything new to the average person's general concept of that particular ingredient. If you're doing something special to it, for example to make a non-crispy thing crispy, then that might be useful information. Also, each ingredient seems to have a list of 3-4 adjectives from which each writer chooses.
Orchard apples (Do they grow any other way, commercially?)
Crisp apples
Warming cinnamon
Fresh lettuce (Well, I would hope so.)
Spicy ginger
Buttery pecans
Sometimes it's okay to let the ingredient speak for itself.
I read someplace that people are willing to pay higher prices with these fancy descriptions. So it is marketing, pure and simple.
I've read the same about marketing.
I wasn't looking for solutions. I just wanted to complain, dammit! :-)
I do avoid restaurants, even pre-pandemic. I'm just remembering from my more spendypants days. Now, I make and/or grow everything from scratch at home. And I do appreciate the "skip to recipe" button on blogs.
Post by: Dicey on June 26, 2020, 12:37:13 PM
Oh, honey, complain away! There's nothing better than a good bellyachin' session now and then. I'd offer a shoulder, but social distancing and all...This might bug me, too. Solution: make your own delicious food. Boom! No menu reading required. As for food blogs, I always skip the blah, blah, blah, and head straight to the recipe.Restaurant menu writers, food bloggers, etc.: Not every ingredient requires an adjective before it, especially if it doesn't add anything new to the average person's general concept of that particular ingredient. If you're doing something special to it, for example to make a non-crispy thing crispy, then that might be useful information. Also, each ingredient seems to have a list of 3-4 adjectives from which each writer chooses.
Orchard apples (Do they grow any other way, commercially?)
Crisp apples
Warming cinnamon
Fresh lettuce (Well, I would hope so.)
Spicy ginger
Buttery pecans
Sometimes it's okay to let the ingredient speak for itself.
I read someplace that people are willing to pay higher prices with these fancy descriptions. So it is marketing, pure and simple.
I've read the same about marketing.
I wasn't looking for solutions. I just wanted to complain, dammit! :-)
I do avoid restaurants, even pre-pandemic. I'm just remembering from my more spendypants days. Now, I make and/or grow everything from scratch at home. And I do appreciate the "skip to recipe" button on blogs.
I don't mind cooking, mostly because I have a crazy nice kitchen, so I haven't so much a peeked at a menu since around the 12th of March. DH's daughter flew into town with her toddler. Baby was hungry and so were we, so we went straight to a restaurant near the airport. Who knew it was going to be our last meal out in months? I'm happy to report that the menu was 100% straightforward, no flowery language at all. Maybe there is hope?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 26, 2020, 02:13:59 PM
This might bug me, too. Solution: make your own delicious food. Boom! No menu reading required. As for food blogs, I always skip the blah, blah, blah, and head straight to the recipe.Restaurant menu writers, food bloggers, etc.: Not every ingredient requires an adjective before it, especially if it doesn't add anything new to the average person's general concept of that particular ingredient. If you're doing something special to it, for example to make a non-crispy thing crispy, then that might be useful information. Also, each ingredient seems to have a list of 3-4 adjectives from which each writer chooses.
Orchard apples (Do they grow any other way, commercially?)
Crisp apples
Warming cinnamon
Fresh lettuce (Well, I would hope so.)
Spicy ginger
Buttery pecans
Sometimes it's okay to let the ingredient speak for itself.
I read someplace that people are willing to pay higher prices with these fancy descriptions. So it is marketing, pure and simple.
I've read the same about marketing.
I wasn't looking for solutions. I just wanted to complain, dammit! :-)
I do avoid restaurants, even pre-pandemic. I'm just remembering from my more spendypants days. Now, I make and/or grow everything from scratch at home. And I do appreciate the "skip to recipe" button on blogs.
My suspicious side always wonders whether the fancy descriptions are gilding a lily or trying to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse, metaphorically speaking.
Post by: slackmax on June 26, 2020, 02:35:14 PM
Post by: HPstache on June 26, 2020, 02:45:09 PM
"At a high rate of speed" - it's ... well, "redundant" doesn't sound quite right, but it's the closest I can get. "At high speed" is a much more correct term.
I think what you're saying is speed IS a rate. So yes, "rate of speed" is redundant.
Unless you are referring to a dragster leaving the line at a high rate of speed, or in other words... accelerating quickly.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on June 26, 2020, 06:20:41 PM
Someone used loupe when they posted about the loop on a knife's sheath.
This misspelling struck me as unusual because loupe is less common than loop.
Isn't it the case that usually a common word is incorrectly substituted for a less common word?
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on June 26, 2020, 06:36:15 PM
I’m not sure if it’s often just a typo, but “DYI” instead of DIY. I’ve seen it often enough that I think people are typing DYI on purpose.
It’s not “Do Yourself It”, folks...it’s Do It Yourself (DIY).
Maybe they’re getting it mixed up with FYI?
I haven't seen DYI.................................yet.
Post by: Freedomin5 on June 27, 2020, 06:13:06 PM
I’m not sure if it’s often just a typo, but “DYI” instead of DIY. I’ve seen it often enough that I think people are typing DYI on purpose.
It’s not “Do Yourself It”, folks...it’s Do It Yourself (DIY).
Maybe they’re getting it mixed up with FYI?
I haven't seen DYI.................................yet.
If you get desperate, just search DYI on this forum.
Post by: DoubleDown on June 29, 2020, 05:01:36 PM
Post by: Kris on June 29, 2020, 05:43:30 PM
Not to drag politics into this non-political thread, but for the third day in a row I've seen Trump supporters quoted in the newspaper saying some version of, "I just wish he'd stop tweeting." Besides being sick of hearing that phrase over and over for the last 3.5 years, it bothers me that apologists think it's "tweeting" that's the problem, not the underlying sentiments and deep flaws of the man issuing those tweets. Yeah, if only he'd stop tweeting, everything would be OK!
That’s not too far off from, “If we’d just stop testing, Covid rates would go down.”
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on June 29, 2020, 06:17:01 PM
I’m not sure if it’s often just a typo, but “DYI” instead of DIY. I’ve seen it often enough that I think people are typing DYI on purpose.
It’s not “Do Yourself It”, folks...it’s Do It Yourself (DIY).
Maybe they’re getting it mixed up with FYI?
I haven't seen DYI.................................yet.
If you get desperate, just search DYI on this forum.
Perhaps DYI is a Freudian slip.
Has the poster had a subconscious feeling that the DIY project may turn out to be too complicated and a failed effort, a Do Yourself In fiasco?
Post by: Freedomin5 on June 29, 2020, 06:38:04 PM
I’m not sure if it’s often just a typo, but “DYI” instead of DIY. I’ve seen it often enough that I think people are typing DYI on purpose.
It’s not “Do Yourself It”, folks...it’s Do It Yourself (DIY).
Maybe they’re getting it mixed up with FYI?
I haven't seen DYI.................................yet.
If you get desperate, just search DYI on this forum.
Perhaps DYI is a Freudian slip.
Has the poster had a subconscious feeling that the DIY project may turn out to be too complicated and a failed effort, a Do Yourself In fiasco?
:D or Drive You Insane?
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on June 29, 2020, 07:04:14 PM
I’m not sure if it’s often just a typo, but “DYI” instead of DIY. I’ve seen it often enough that I think people are typing DYI on purpose.
It’s not “Do Yourself It”, folks...it’s Do It Yourself (DIY).
Maybe they’re getting it mixed up with FYI?
I haven't seen DYI.................................yet.
If you get desperate, just search DYI on this forum.
Perhaps DYI is a Freudian slip.
Has the poster had a subconscious feeling that the DIY project may turn out to be too complicated and a failed effort, a Do Yourself In fiasco?
:D or Drive You Insane?
Well done!
Drive You Insane is MUCH better than Do Yourself In.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on July 20, 2020, 03:49:12 PM
1) "Dated" - often used to justify spending large sums of money on new kitchen counters or a new car. Just because some TV show or kitchen industry says that granite and stainless steel are passe doesn't magically render one's kitchen useless.
and
2) "New normal" - to me, this sounds like giving up, adopting an attitude of helplessness, and relinquishing any motivation to improve an individual's (or group's) situation. I remember it happening during the Great Recession (remember all the projections of reduced growth for the foreseeable future?), and now I'm seeing it again with COVID-19, and I refuse to accept that the human race can't overcome this latest crisis and get back in gear.
Post by: Freedomin5 on July 20, 2020, 04:40:08 PM
I've got two that I'd like to submit:
1) "Dated" - often used to justify spending large sums of money on new kitchen counters or a new car. Just because some TV show or kitchen industry says that granite and stainless steel are passe doesn't magically render one's kitchen useless.
But then your kitchen won’t Spark Joy when you are cooking in it, because of your crummy five-year-old, tired, passé granite countertops!
Post by: Kris on July 20, 2020, 05:22:02 PM
I've got two that I'd like to submit:
1) "Dated" - often used to justify spending large sums of money on new kitchen counters or a new car. Just because some TV show or kitchen industry says that granite and stainless steel are passe doesn't magically render one's kitchen useless.
But then your kitchen won’t Spark Joy when you are cooking in it, because of your crummy five-year-old, tired, passé granite countertops!
Omg, that spark joy thing makes me rage! So many of my friends fell for this. Capitalism sold as minimalism. It was a brilliant scam, I’ll give Marie Kondo that.
Post by: Travis on July 20, 2020, 06:11:51 PM
I've got two that I'd like to submit:
1) "Dated" - often used to justify spending large sums of money on new kitchen counters or a new car. Just because some TV show or kitchen industry says that granite and stainless steel are passe doesn't magically render one's kitchen useless.
But then your kitchen won’t Spark Joy when you are cooking in it, because of your crummy five-year-old, tired, passé granite countertops!
Omg, that spark joy think makes me rage! So many of my friends fell for this. Capitalism sold as minimalism. It was a brilliant scam, I’ll give Marie Kondo that.
Minimalism as a term is being perverted in so many ways. I watched a British home design show where a guy spent about $1 million building his wife her dream home on a tiny plot in London where they both kept repeating how she's a minimalist, but what they really meant was "she likes quiet spaces and doesn't want anything showing" likes clothes, books, and appliances. When I hear "minimalist" I think of someone happily living out of a suitcase with a home/apartment just barely large enough for habitation.
Post by: phildonnia on July 23, 2020, 11:51:00 AM
It was bad enough when it was used as a stock way to soften the blow of lower levels of customer service. "In these troubling times, blah, blah, blah, you may experience longer wait times."
Now it's just a gratuitous introduction to any kind of commercial statement that have nothing to do with the times, difficult or otherwise. "In these difficult times, we are here to offer competitive rates on auto loans."
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on July 23, 2020, 04:55:03 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on July 23, 2020, 07:42:19 PM
Post by: JetBlast on July 23, 2020, 08:54:03 PM
For some reason people think expressing a viewpoint contrary to their own must be a disingenuous display and not a sincere disagreement of opinion. I’m not sure when honest disagreement became an impossibility in our society.
Post by: Kris on July 24, 2020, 05:49:07 AM
Virtue signaling. I’m sure it was said somewhere in the last 25 pages but I’ll add it again.
For some reason people think expressing a viewpoint contrary to their own must be a disingenuous display and not a sincere disagreement of opinion. I’m not sure when honest disagreement became an impossibility in our society.
I hate that, too. I think it says more about the person using the phrase. Person A who accuses person B of “virtue signaling” is basically saying person B’s moral compass is fake. Generally, I find that people who accuse others of such things are projecting. In other words, since I do not really have a moral compass on that issue, I assume no one else really does, either.
Post by: iris lily on July 24, 2020, 08:28:12 AM
I've got two that I'd like to submit:
1) "Dated" - often used to justify spending large sums of money on new kitchen counters or a new car. Just because some TV show or kitchen industry says that granite and stainless steel are passe doesn't magically render one's kitchen useless.
But then your kitchen won’t Spark Joy when you are cooking in it, because of your crummy five-year-old, tired, passé granite countertops!
Omg, that spark joy thing makes me rage! So many of my friends fell for this. Capitalism sold as minimalism. It was a brilliant scam, I’ll give Marie Kondo that.
But we can have old, worn things that spark joy because they are useful.I have several kitchen things that do.And I have other household tools, and even items of useful clothing, same thing.
I like the phrase “ spark joy” and use it often when deciding what to downsize. Things that spark annoyance go out immediately. Things that spark no emotion at all are candidates for decluttering.
Post by: Kris on July 24, 2020, 08:38:21 AM
I've got two that I'd like to submit:
1) "Dated" - often used to justify spending large sums of money on new kitchen counters or a new car. Just because some TV show or kitchen industry says that granite and stainless steel are passe doesn't magically render one's kitchen useless.
But then your kitchen won’t Spark Joy when you are cooking in it, because of your crummy five-year-old, tired, passé granite countertops!
Omg, that spark joy thing makes me rage! So many of my friends fell for this. Capitalism sold as minimalism. It was a brilliant scam, I’ll give Marie Kondo that.
But we can have old, worn things that spark joy because they are useful.I have several kitchen things that do.And I have other household tools, and even items of useful clothing, same thing.
I like the phrase “ spark joy” and use it often when deciding what to downsize. Things that spark annoyance go out immediately. Things that spark no emotion at all are candidates for decluttering.
I completely agree. But when Kondo started hawking pretty objects in addition to her book, the “minimalists” I know ate that up. So the message they ingested was, get rid of everything that doesn’t spark joy, and replace some of it with new stuff that does. Perfectly serviceable couch that doesn’t thrill you every time you sit on it? Get a better one!
Edit: Looking at her website... just one example. If you find that your current tuning fork does not spark joy, here is a lovely new one -- and it comes with a rose quartz crystal! Marie uses hers every day to reset! <3 Only $75 joy-sparking dollars!
https://shop.konmari.com/collections/japanese-heritage/products/konmari-decor-konmari-tuning-fork-crystal-set-rose-quartz
/s
Post by: Jouer on July 24, 2020, 08:39:41 AM
I'm getting a little sick of the phrase "In these (trying/difficult/uncertain/troubling) times".
It was bad enough when it was used as a stock way to soften the blow of lower levels of customer service. "In these troubling times, blah, blah, blah, you may experience longer wait times."
Now it's just a gratuitous introduction to any kind of commercial statement that have nothing to do with the times, difficult or otherwise. "In these difficult times, we are here to offer competitive rates on auto loans."
When companies say "due to [reasons] weight times are longer than usual" I hear "we suck at some other channel so more people are calling us....but we suck at the phone channel, too, so this will suck for you."
Post by: Freedomin5 on July 26, 2020, 01:57:59 AM
I've got two that I'd like to submit:
1) "Dated" - often used to justify spending large sums of money on new kitchen counters or a new car. Just because some TV show or kitchen industry says that granite and stainless steel are passe doesn't magically render one's kitchen useless.
But then your kitchen won’t Spark Joy when you are cooking in it, because of your crummy five-year-old, tired, passé granite countertops!
Omg, that spark joy thing makes me rage! So many of my friends fell for this. Capitalism sold as minimalism. It was a brilliant scam, I’ll give Marie Kondo that.
But we can have old, worn things that spark joy because they are useful.I have several kitchen things that do.And I have other household tools, and even items of useful clothing, same thing.
I like the phrase “ spark joy” and use it often when deciding what to downsize. Things that spark annoyance go out immediately. Things that spark no emotion at all are candidates for decluttering.
I completely agree. But when Kondo started hawking pretty objects in addition to her book, the “minimalists” I know ate that up. So the message they ingested was, get rid of everything that doesn’t spark joy, and replace some of it with new stuff that does. Perfectly serviceable couch that doesn’t thrill you every time you sit on it? Get a better one!
Edit: Looking at her website... just one example. If you find that your current tuning fork does not spark joy, here is a lovely new one -- and it comes with a rose quartz crystal! Marie uses hers every day to reset! <3 Only $75 joy-sparking dollars!
https://shop.konmari.com/collections/japanese-heritage/products/konmari-decor-konmari-tuning-fork-crystal-set-rose-quartz
/s
Wow...that’s ridiculous. She’s selling two pieces of bent wood for $104!
https://shop.konmari.com/collections/the-konmari-method/products/konmari-tidying-motarasu-ribbon-hook (https://shop.konmari.com/collections/the-konmari-method/products/konmari-tidying-motarasu-ribbon-hook)
Post by: GreenSheep on September 01, 2020, 08:36:50 AM
"Do I think that saving money is a good idea? Yes, and I save as much as I can. Do I think that one should stop feeding one's children in order to save more money? Of course not, which is why I..."
I understand that it can be used effectively for emphasis, especially in public speaking, but it seems to be becoming so common that it's losing that power. I just read a post in another forum in which the writer used asked a question and answered his own question three times in one paragraph. It makes for cumbersome reading.
Post by: Bloop Bloop on September 01, 2020, 09:57:31 AM
Just shut up.
Post by: sui generis on September 01, 2020, 10:37:58 AM
"Begs the question"
Just shut up.
I may not hate it quite as much as you, but does bother me that many (most?) people use it incorrectly.
"Theory of the case" which I had only heard previously in law school, but is now something people use a lot. Because it sounds more exciting than just "theory", I guess?
Post by: Paul der Krake on September 01, 2020, 01:15:02 PM
WE KNOW.
Post by: dividendman on September 01, 2020, 01:23:25 PM
“In the midst of a global pandemic”
WE KNOW.
Do we though?
Post by: GuitarStv on September 01, 2020, 01:52:56 PM
“In the midst of a global pandemic”
WE KNOW.
Do we though?
lol, chinmaskers.
Post by: BlueHouse on September 01, 2020, 06:56:17 PM
Mistake a word (in writing) that they've heard used with another unrelated word that sounds similar. It's a dead giveaway that they don't read much.
Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
Post by: teen persuasion on September 01, 2020, 07:32:12 PM
Although I'm probably guilty of doing this at one time or another, I really hate when other people do it:Variants on this that have been driving me crazy this week:
Mistake a word (in writing) that they've heard used with another unrelated word that sounds similar. It's a dead giveaway that they don't read much.
Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
DH and I watched some documentary about a region of China and the waning traditional crafts that will soon be lost because the elders have no one to pass the knowledge to. The narrator spoke in excellent English, but multiple times used the words "motive/motives" when they obviously meant motif/motifs (design elements in handicrafts), both in speaking and in the captions.
Advertisement with Adina Menzel singing about "taxidermy", and gets corrected that it's "tax attorney". To which she replies "oh, yeah, I totally read that wrong". No - they sound similar, you could have heard it wrong, but they don't resemble one another in print.
Slightly different pet peeve - authors attempting to explain the pronunciation of an unusual character name (usually in a series, in 3rd or 4th book) by said character correcting another character's mistaken pronunciation: "it's A-la, not Eye-la". The problem with the device is that the name has only been spoken, never read (the opposite problem of the readers), so there's no way the character could be in doubt about the pronunciation. I've seen it at least twice, and neither time could it be tortured enough so it made sense.
Post by: Travis on September 01, 2020, 07:46:21 PM
Although I'm probably guilty of doing this at one time or another, I really hate when other people do it:
Mistake a word (in writing) that they've heard used with another unrelated word that sounds similar. It's a dead giveaway that they don't read much.
Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
A coworker keeps asking about our infanstructure. Another about our inflastructure.
For all intensive purposes...
Post by: sui generis on September 01, 2020, 07:56:29 PM
Although I'm probably guilty of doing this at one time or another, I really hate when other people do it:
Mistake a word (in writing) that they've heard used with another unrelated word that sounds similar. It's a dead giveaway that they don't read much.
Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
Really egregious one I saw recently in my law blogs - some non-lawyer arguing that Kyle Rittenhouse (of killing-protestors-in-Kenosha-WI fame) couldn't be guilty of first degree murder because there was no malice of gore thought. I pray this was an isolated incident and this is not what the average person is out there thinking is an element of first degree murder.
Post by: marble_faun on September 01, 2020, 07:57:00 PM
“In the midst of a global pandemic”
WE KNOW.
Do we though?
lol, chinmaskers.
CHINMASKERS!!!
Now there's a word I actually needed!
Post by: ixtap on September 01, 2020, 08:10:05 PM
Although I'm probably guilty of doing this at one time or another, I really hate when other people do it:
Mistake a word (in writing) that they've heard used with another unrelated word that sounds similar. It's a dead giveaway that they don't read much.
Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
A coworker keeps asking about our infanstructure. Another about our inflastructure.
For all intensive purposes...
Minus well. It has become this one guy's catchphrase, besides. Like he will post himself eating something decadent and the only words will be "Minus well..."
Post by: Paul der Krake on September 02, 2020, 12:06:48 AM
Post by: merula on September 02, 2020, 07:03:42 AM
Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
I'm completely lost here. I got fiscal, but what's the word they meant for visual?
Post by: ixtap on September 02, 2020, 07:17:42 AM
Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
I'm completely lost here. I got fiscal, but what's the word they meant for visual?
Vigil?
Post by: GreenSheep on September 02, 2020, 07:37:31 AM
Minus well. It has become this one guy's catchphrase, besides. Like he will post himself eating something decadent and the only words will be "Minus well..."
Haha, I had an email from a friend once in which he said, "Minds will kill two birds..." But at least this was back in in college, and all of the rest of us on the mass email made fun of him.
Also, a sad commentary on the state of reading for pleasure these days... People who say "I read it on audiobook." If you listened to it, then you didn't read it. I've had members of my BOOK CLUB, which is for READING, do this.
Post by: iluvzbeach on September 03, 2020, 06:29:47 PM
Post by: Bloop Bloop on September 03, 2020, 06:49:26 PM
(unless paired with Obelix)
Post by: Morning Glory on September 03, 2020, 07:34:44 PM
Asterix
(unless paired with Obelix)
There is a type of hand tremor called asterixis that comes from liver failure I think.
There is also a brand of frozen potatoes named after the acquired inability to read.l
Post by: calimom on September 03, 2020, 08:35:02 PM
I get frustrated when I hear someone say fustrated or flustrated.
I'm devastated when someone spells it devasted. Other commonly misused words are loose for lose. (I'm loosing it). And 'advise' when someone is asking for advice.
Why?
Post by: ysette9 on September 03, 2020, 11:40:55 PM
AsterixBut that would be Astérix, right? :)
(unless paired with Obelix)
Post by: Travis on September 04, 2020, 10:42:44 AM
If the Facebook group's policies dictate that your post is not allowed, the mods are going to delete it whether you make the above statement or not. Group and Forum rules don't have a footnote that says "with your permission."
Post by: sui generis on September 04, 2020, 05:00:18 PM
"Feel free to delete..."
If the Facebook group's policies dictate that your post is not allowed, the mods are going to delete it whether you make the above statement or not. Group and Forum rules don't have a footnote that says "with your permission."
Agree. Also I usually see this in the form of "... If this isn't allowed." in which case I'm like, can you take two seconds to check whether it is yourself? No? Just want someone else to do that work for you, huh? Cool cool.
Post by: GreenSheep on September 04, 2020, 07:05:41 PM
"Feel free to delete..."
If the Facebook group's policies dictate that your post is not allowed, the mods are going to delete it whether you make the above statement or not. Group and Forum rules don't have a footnote that says "with your permission."
Agree. Also I usually see this in the form of "... If this isn't allowed." in which case I'm like, can you take two seconds to check whether it is yourself? No? Just want someone else to do that work for you, huh? Cool cool.
Sounds like the online version of "No offense, but..."
Post by: BlueHouse on September 05, 2020, 03:26:42 PM
Yes! At least that's what I think. It was a group of mourners praying.Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
I'm completely lost here. I got fiscal, but what's the word they meant for visual?
Vigil?
Speaking of that, I really don't like mass grief. I was raised to grieve privately. Time and place and all that. I know it's outdated, but I really do not like when entire communities show up just to grieve -- especially when it's a celebrity that no one knew in real life.
p.s. I do not intend this to mean protests over injustices that result in deaths.
Post by: Travis on September 05, 2020, 06:09:02 PM
Yes! At least that's what I think. It was a group of mourners praying.Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
I'm completely lost here. I got fiscal, but what's the word they meant for visual?
Vigil?
Speaking of that, I really don't like mass grief. I was raised to grieve privately. Time and place and all that. I know it's outdated, but I really do not like when entire communities show up just to grieve -- especially when it's a celebrity that no one knew in real life.
The father of someone in my unit died recently and a card was passed around. It took me a half hour to figure out what to write because a) I prefer to have those conversations in person and b) damn near every comment on the card said "sympathies" and "condolences" and it felt people were just checking the block.
Also, I don't write happy birthday messages on the public facing side of Facebook. If I want to say something, I'll send a direct message.
Post by: shelivesthedream on September 10, 2020, 11:47:17 AM
Post by: Dicey on September 11, 2020, 10:34:14 AM
I hear you on what to write. When caught in this situation, I usually go for memories, as in "I hope you have many happy memories of..." or "they will live forever in your memories" or some such. This only works if you know the relationship was not estranged.Yes! At least that's what I think. It was a group of mourners praying.Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
I'm completely lost here. I got fiscal, but what's the word they meant for visual?
Vigil?
Speaking of that, I really don't like mass grief. I was raised to grieve privately. Time and place and all that. I know it's outdated, but I really do not like when entire communities show up just to grieve -- especially when it's a celebrity that no one knew in real life.
The father of someone in my unit died recently and a card was passed around. It took me a half hour to figure out what to write because a) I prefer to have those conversations in person and b) damn near every comment on the card said "sympathies" and "condolences" and it felt people were just checking the block.
Also, I don't write happy birthday messages on the public facing side of Facebook. If I want to say something, I'll send a direct message.
Post by: phildonnia on September 14, 2020, 02:43:47 PM
And second, it always comes as a prologue to some kind of bad news. I mean, you could just come out and say: we're closing your work office, and your kids can't play outside. But first, a little preamble to get you in the mood: "We are experiencing unprecedented times..." No, its doesn't soften the blow. It raises my anxiety before you even get started.
Also, it's a lame excuse. "We are experiencing unprecedented call volume..." No, you're not. Your customer service sucks as always, and you're trying to blame it on... a lack of precedent, I guess.
Post by: ketchup on September 14, 2020, 03:04:12 PM
Although I'm probably guilty of doing this at one time or another, I really hate when other people do it:https://www.reddit.com/r/BoneAppleTea/
Mistake a word (in writing) that they've heard used with another unrelated word that sounds similar. It's a dead giveaway that they don't read much.
Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
Lately I've seen "set up"/"setup" and "break down"/"breakdown" used interchangeably. Just, no.
Post by: Master of None on September 24, 2020, 02:28:49 PM
Post by: Kris on September 24, 2020, 02:34:45 PM
Although I'm probably guilty of doing this at one time or another, I really hate when other people do it:https://www.reddit.com/r/BoneAppleTea/
Mistake a word (in writing) that they've heard used with another unrelated word that sounds similar. It's a dead giveaway that they don't read much.
Some things I've seen recently:
Neighbors were invited to attend a visual.
A coworker wanted to know if our budget year was a calendar year or a physical year.
Lately I've seen "set up"/"setup" and "break down"/"breakdown" used interchangeably. Just, no.
That bugs me a ton. And “workout”/“work out”... “login”/“log in”...
There are so many.
Post by: ysette9 on September 24, 2020, 02:59:41 PM
A la chinmaskers, we need a word for people who wear visors so far pushed back they're basically like the peak of a baseball cap so all TEH VIRUS can just whoosh underneath. I guess they're protecting anyone substantially taller than them...?I saw some italien study showed that the face shields were not effective in preventing the spread of covid, unlike masks. So maybe it doesn’t matter too much how they are work since they don’t work either way.
Post by: ysette9 on September 24, 2020, 03:00:34 PM
"On tomorrow". This one pains me to read. A few of my peers use it frequently and it never reads right.What does that even mean?
Post by: Master of None on September 24, 2020, 03:09:00 PM
"On tomorrow". This one pains me to read. A few of my peers use it frequently and it never reads right.What does that even mean?
It is used similar to...."We will meet on Friday at 5pm." In this case it would be, "We will meet on tomorrow at 5pm." Or On tomorrow we will go to the store. I just can't.
Post by: ysette9 on September 24, 2020, 03:29:16 PM
Oh weird. I’ve never seen that."On tomorrow". This one pains me to read. A few of my peers use it frequently and it never reads right.What does that even mean?
It is used similar to...."We will meet on Friday at 5pm." In this case it would be, "We will meet on tomorrow at 5pm." Or On tomorrow we will go to the store. I just can't.
Post by: ketchup on September 25, 2020, 06:07:26 PM
I've known two that do this. One is a coworker. I've also heard her say "on today."Oh weird. I’ve never seen that."On tomorrow". This one pains me to read. A few of my peers use it frequently and it never reads right.What does that even mean?
It is used similar to...."We will meet on Friday at 5pm." In this case it would be, "We will meet on tomorrow at 5pm." Or On tomorrow we will go to the store. I just can't.
Both people were originally from Texas. Not sure if that's a pattern or not.
Post by: Morning Glory on September 26, 2020, 08:55:43 AM
I live in the land of passive aggression and covert racism. Thanks for letting me rant.
Post by: DoubleDown on September 26, 2020, 09:57:53 AM
Did I mention "sketchy". As in "this neighborhood is a little sketchy". (Even worse it can be used to describe a person). I automatically assume that the person saying it is either racist or a snob. It's antonym appears to be "better schools". It sounds even worse when they shorten it to "sketch".
I live in the land of passive aggression and covert racism. Thanks for letting me rant.
Hmm, that one never bothered me, any more than it would bother me to hear someone describe a neighborhood (or advice or anything else) as "questionable", "skeezy", "untrustworthy", etc. It doesn't seem like a "code" word or dog-whistle word to me (but I'm a white man).
Post by: Paul der Krake on September 26, 2020, 11:54:52 AM
Post by: marble_faun on September 26, 2020, 12:03:53 PM
Did I mention "sketchy". As in "this neighborhood is a little sketchy". (Even worse it can be used to describe a person). I automatically assume that the person saying it is either racist or a snob. It's antonym appears to be "better schools". It sounds even worse when they shorten it to "sketch".
I live in the land of passive aggression and covert racism. Thanks for letting me rant.
Hmm, that one never bothered me, any more than it would bother me to hear someone describe a neighborhood (or advice or anything else) as "questionable", "skeezy", "untrustworthy", etc. It doesn't seem like a "code" word or dog-whistle word to me (but I'm a white man).
Yeah, I don't think there is anything wrong with "sketchy" itself, beyond any other type of negative descriptor.
It seems less racist than describing anything a little rough as "ghetto," as people did back in my day (the 90s).
Post by: RetiredAt63 on September 26, 2020, 02:18:01 PM
Did I mention "sketchy". As in "this neighborhood is a little sketchy". (Even worse it can be used to describe a person). I automatically assume that the person saying it is either racist or a snob. It's antonym appears to be "better schools". It sounds even worse when they shorten it to "sketch".
I live in the land of passive aggression and covert racism. Thanks for letting me rant.
Hmm, that one never bothered me, any more than it would bother me to hear someone describe a neighborhood (or advice or anything else) as "questionable", "skeezy", "untrustworthy", etc. It doesn't seem like a "code" word or dog-whistle word to me (but I'm a white man).
Yeah, I don't think there is anything wrong with "sketchy" itself, beyond any other type of negative descriptor.
It seems less racist than describing anything a little rough as "ghetto," as people did back in my day (the 90s).
Ghetto, slum area occupied by a minority. Which is why "student ghetto" is a thing, rental housing close to colleges and universities is often both expensive and horrible. Like the McGill ghetto in Montreal. Like the apartment my DD lived in for a month that was horrible, literally a fire trap.
Post by: dividendman on September 26, 2020, 03:26:06 PM
Did I mention "sketchy". As in "this neighborhood is a little sketchy". (Even worse it can be used to describe a person). I automatically assume that the person saying it is either racist or a snob. It's antonym appears to be "better schools". It sounds even worse when they shorten it to "sketch".
I live in the land of passive aggression and covert racism. Thanks for letting me rant.
So basically you're saying people who use sketch and sketchy are sketch AF.
(I hate when people say AF at the end of something like "sketch AF")
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on September 26, 2020, 07:52:44 PM
I've known two that do this. One is a coworker. I've also heard her say "on today."Oh weird. I’ve never seen that."On tomorrow". This one pains me to read. A few of my peers use it frequently and it never reads right.What does that even mean?
It is used similar to...."We will meet on Friday at 5pm." In this case it would be, "We will meet on tomorrow at 5pm." Or On tomorrow we will go to the store. I just can't.
Both people were originally from Texas. Not sure if that's a pattern or not.
I've read "on the morrow" that means (I think) "tomorrow."
.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on September 26, 2020, 08:06:05 PM
I get frustrated when I hear someone say fustrated or flustrated.
Your posting of "flustrated" is the first I've ever seen or heard it.
I like it as a portmanteau word of flustered + frustrated.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on September 26, 2020, 08:15:33 PM
Really egregious one I saw recently in my law blogs - some non-lawyer arguing that Kyle Rittenhouse (of killing-protestors-in-Kenosha-WI fame) couldn't be guilty of first degree murder because there was no malice of gore thought. I pray this was an isolated incident and this is not what the average person is out there thinking is an element of first degree murder.
Despite the seriousness of the matter I just guffawed.
Post by: marble_faun on September 26, 2020, 09:39:42 PM
Did I mention "sketchy". As in "this neighborhood is a little sketchy". (Even worse it can be used to describe a person). I automatically assume that the person saying it is either racist or a snob. It's antonym appears to be "better schools". It sounds even worse when they shorten it to "sketch".
I live in the land of passive aggression and covert racism. Thanks for letting me rant.
Hmm, that one never bothered me, any more than it would bother me to hear someone describe a neighborhood (or advice or anything else) as "questionable", "skeezy", "untrustworthy", etc. It doesn't seem like a "code" word or dog-whistle word to me (but I'm a white man).
Yeah, I don't think there is anything wrong with "sketchy" itself, beyond any other type of negative descriptor.
It seems less racist than describing anything a little rough as "ghetto," as people did back in my day (the 90s).
Ghetto, slum area occupied by a minority. Which is why "student ghetto" is a thing, rental housing close to colleges and universities is often both expensive and horrible. Like the McGill ghetto in Montreal. Like the apartment my DD lived in for a month that was horrible, literally a fire trap.
Ghetto was slang for anything shabby and ludicrously bad. Like if you had to attach a broken side-mirror to your car with duct tape: "That's so ghetto." People my age (old millennials) said this all the time, and it was a reference to black ghettos. Sketchy seems like a non-racialized alternative.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on September 27, 2020, 07:04:58 AM
Did I mention "sketchy". As in "this neighborhood is a little sketchy". (Even worse it can be used to describe a person). I automatically assume that the person saying it is either racist or a snob. It's antonym appears to be "better schools". It sounds even worse when they shorten it to "sketch".
I live in the land of passive aggression and covert racism. Thanks for letting me rant.
Hmm, that one never bothered me, any more than it would bother me to hear someone describe a neighborhood (or advice or anything else) as "questionable", "skeezy", "untrustworthy", etc. It doesn't seem like a "code" word or dog-whistle word to me (but I'm a white man).
Yeah, I don't think there is anything wrong with "sketchy" itself, beyond any other type of negative descriptor.
It seems less racist than describing anything a little rough as "ghetto," as people did back in my day (the 90s).
Ghetto, slum area occupied by a minority. Which is why "student ghetto" is a thing, rental housing close to colleges and universities is often both expensive and horrible. Like the McGill ghetto in Montreal. Like the apartment my DD lived in for a month that was horrible, literally a fire trap.
Ghetto was slang for anything shabby and ludicrously bad. Like if you had to attach a broken side-mirror to your car with duct tape: "That's so ghetto." People my age (old millennials) said this all the time, and it was a reference to black ghettos. Sketchy seems like a non-racialized alternative.
So ghetto morphed from super bad housing for a particular group (student ghetto, Warsaw ghetto, etc.) to super bad anything. Language changes.
Post by: simonsez on November 16, 2020, 03:11:36 PM
Post by: Kris on November 16, 2020, 04:21:40 PM
Adding 's to non-possessive words when the normal plural would work just fine.
And family names. Which we will see a lot more of with the approaching season of holiday cards. Ugh.
Post by: nessness on November 16, 2020, 06:09:17 PM
Yes! I recently ordered a custom sign that said "The Smiths" (not my actual name, but mine isn't any more complicated). The woman making it messaged me to confirm I didn't want it to say "The Smith's".Adding 's to non-possessive words when the normal plural would work just fine.
And family names. Which we will see a lot more of with the approaching season of holiday cards. Ugh.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on November 16, 2020, 07:03:49 PM
When reporting on the infinitesimal incidence of voter fraud a reporter said "infantile."
Post by: Miss Piggy on December 01, 2020, 08:13:33 PM
That's my new most hated word.
Post by: sui generis on December 01, 2020, 09:05:38 PM
Maths.
That's my new most hated word.
Oh, I feel like you are going to get some pushback on that one! I used to be skeptical, too, until a British friend pointed out that mathematics is plural so why not the shortened version?
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 02, 2020, 10:09:06 AM
Maths.
That's my new most hated word.
Your post is the first I've heard or read of "Maths."
Post by: SunnyDays on December 02, 2020, 11:24:18 AM
Post by: dandarc on December 02, 2020, 12:28:04 PM
Pivot. It's the new catch word. Everyone is pivoting their business. I think of basketball every time.Just don't change your business' pivot foot. That's a travel and a turnover (unless your competition is Duke and they do it).
Post by: GreenSheep on December 02, 2020, 12:38:34 PM
Pivot. It's the new catch word. Everyone is pivoting their business. I think of basketball every time.
I think of that episode of "Friends" when they're trying to move a couch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n67RYI_0sc0
Post by: Chaplin on December 02, 2020, 08:31:33 PM
Maths.
That's my new most hated word.
Awkward.... I'm on board with replacing "math" with "maths."
Post by: solon on December 02, 2020, 08:46:39 PM
Maths.
That's my new most hated word.
Awkward.... I'm on board with replacing "math" with "maths."
"Maths" is British for "math".
It's no different than gaol/jail.
Post by: Chaplin on December 07, 2020, 10:42:40 AM
Post by: Miss Piggy on December 07, 2020, 07:04:10 PM
Maths.
That's my new most hated word.
Awkward.... I'm on board with replacing "math" with "maths."
"Maths" is British for "math".
It's no different than gaol/jail.
Well, I've learned something new today.
(I'm still going to hate it, though.)
Post by: Dicey on December 07, 2020, 07:26:27 PM
Post by: Miss Piggy on December 07, 2020, 08:09:04 PM
@Miss Piggy, I love that you started this thread twenty seven pages ago and you're still here, fighting the good fight. Thank you!
Yeah...I had no idea words bugged so many people! Nice to see I'm not alone in this.
Post by: Vashy on December 07, 2020, 10:25:46 PM
Post by: Dicey on December 07, 2020, 11:30:37 PM
Yeah, well, I'm going to be the asshole on this one. Someone has started a thread about "co-vid". Head --> Desk@Miss Piggy, I love that you started this thread twenty seven pages ago and you're still here, fighting the good fight. Thank you!
Yeah...I had no idea words bugged so many people! Nice to see I'm not alone in this.
Post by: BlueHouse on December 08, 2020, 08:42:29 AM
Are we now so lazy that we cannot include "What"? Ugh.
Post by: GreenSheep on December 08, 2020, 04:29:24 PM
"The Fuck"? As a question.
Are we now so lazy that we cannot include "What"? Ugh.
Similar to this... "AF" in place of "as fuck." In terms of syllables, the letters are no shorter than the words. I don't think it's just a way to shield children's ears, as I often hear it in groups of only adults. I think someone once thought it was cute, and now that it's been repeated millions of times, it's just dumb.
Maybe this has been said here before, but... I think four-letter words should be reserved for times when very forceful emphasis is required, or they just lose their power.
Post by: HPstache on December 08, 2020, 04:32:30 PM
"The Fuck"? As a question.
Are we now so lazy that we cannot include "What"? Ugh.
Similar to this... "AF" in place of "as fuck." In terms of syllables, the letters are no shorter than the words. I don't think it's just a way to shield children's ears, as I often hear it in groups of only adults. I think someone once thought it was cute, and now that it's been repeated millions of times, it's just dumb.
Maybe this has been said here before, but... I think four-letter words should be reserved for times when very forceful emphasis is required, or they just lose their power.
I have no problems with censoring one's speech with acronyms... I hear people say "BS" a lot with no kids around as well.
Post by: BlueHouse on December 11, 2020, 06:06:54 AM
Do you mean they verbalize this "AF" ? I definitely don't mind it in writing. But I guess it's no different than saying LOL out loud and that's become kind of mainstream."The Fuck"? As a question.
Are we now so lazy that we cannot include "What"? Ugh.
Similar to this... "AF" in place of "as fuck." In terms of syllables, the letters are no shorter than the words. I don't think it's just a way to shield children's ears, as I often hear it in groups of only adults. I think someone once thought it was cute, and now that it's been repeated millions of times, it's just dumb.
Maybe this has been said here before, but... I think four-letter words should be reserved for times when very forceful emphasis is required, or they just lose their power.
Post by: Adventine on December 11, 2020, 06:39:50 AM
"As per"
"Furnitures"
Post by: GreenSheep on December 11, 2020, 08:28:17 AM
Do you mean they verbalize this "AF" ? I definitely don't mind it in writing. But I guess it's no different than saying LOL out loud and that's become kind of mainstream."The Fuck"? As a question.
Are we now so lazy that we cannot include "What"? Ugh.
Similar to this... "AF" in place of "as fuck." In terms of syllables, the letters are no shorter than the words. I don't think it's just a way to shield children's ears, as I often hear it in groups of only adults. I think someone once thought it was cute, and now that it's been repeated millions of times, it's just dumb.
Maybe this has been said here before, but... I think four-letter words should be reserved for times when very forceful emphasis is required, or they just lose their power.
Yes, "AF" spoken out loud. I find it annoying when written, too, but I think you have a good point... it's especially irritating when spoken. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "LOL" out loud. That just seems completely ridiculous. If something is funny, LAUGH!! Saying "LOL" instead of laughing seems kind of... robotic.
Post by: GuitarStv on December 11, 2020, 02:06:57 PM
Post by: nessness on December 11, 2020, 03:02:08 PM
Post by: Dicey on December 11, 2020, 03:09:12 PM
"Fixed that for you", or its abbreviation "FTFY", accompanied by an often snarky "correction" of someone else's post. It usually just comes off as rude and obnoxious.Dunno, oftentimes the "fix" is something funny. Sometimes it's freaking hilarious. If someone does it to me, my response is usually palm to forehead, "I wish I'd thought of that."
I've also used it when I think someone is being too hard on themselves.
Post by: BlueHouse on December 13, 2020, 04:47:19 PM
"Fixed that for you", or its abbreviation "FTFY", accompanied by an often snarky "correction" of someone else's post. It usually just comes off as rude and obnoxious.I agree with everything in this statement. I just find it rude. I know people think they’re being funny, but it starts with the expression that the OP is wrong. And whether as a joke or not, it comes off as rude more often a than people want to believe.
Post by: slackmax on December 13, 2020, 05:06:38 PM
'Press conference' is just fine, no need to clue me in to the 'in crowd' verbiage, thanks.
Post by: okisok on December 13, 2020, 07:13:43 PM
Prolly
I can't even describe the emotions that "word" evokes in my soul.
Is this a regional contraction? I've seen it multiple times on forums, but I've never ever heard it said. In my area probably is commonly shortened to prob'ly.
Reading through past posts, and I agree it's regional. Here in my part of the southern Midwest, we use 'prolly' in texts because we say 'prolly' in conversation. As in, "I prolly better git goin', my momanem're fixin' a big supper and my granny'll tan my hide if I'm late."
Not saying it's right, just saying it's real here.
Post by: MilesTeg on December 13, 2020, 10:01:58 PM
"Fixed it for you", or its abbreviation "FIFY", accompanied by an often snarky "correction" of someone else's post. It usually just comes off as rude and obnoxious.
Fixed It For You
Post by: dividendman on December 13, 2020, 11:25:11 PM
Do you mean they verbalize this "AF" ? I definitely don't mind it in writing. But I guess it's no different than saying LOL out loud and that's become kind of mainstream."The Fuck"? As a question.
Are we now so lazy that we cannot include "What"? Ugh.
Similar to this... "AF" in place of "as fuck." In terms of syllables, the letters are no shorter than the words. I don't think it's just a way to shield children's ears, as I often hear it in groups of only adults. I think someone once thought it was cute, and now that it's been repeated millions of times, it's just dumb.
Maybe this has been said here before, but... I think four-letter words should be reserved for times when very forceful emphasis is required, or they just lose their power.
Yes, "AF" spoken out loud. I find it annoying when written, too, but I think you have a good point... it's especially irritating when spoken. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "LOL" out loud. That just seems completely ridiculous. If something is funny, LAUGH!! Saying "LOL" instead of laughing seems kind of... robotic.
If you say "LOL" out loud to someone.... isn't that lying? You don't can't say LOL in person without lying because, you know, you'd be LOL.
Post by: lazycow on December 14, 2020, 03:41:24 AM
Maths.
That's my new most hated word.
Awkward.... I'm on board with replacing "math" with "maths."
"Maths" is British for "math".
It's no different than gaol/jail.
Well, I've learned something new today.
(I'm still going to hate it, though.)
In Australia it is Maths. I cringe when anyone calls it Math.
I used to be a member of a forum where people referred to theselves as 'norti', as in "I was norti today and ate too much ice cream. Arghhhh. No, it is *not* cute.
I also cannot abide seeing divine written as devine. Like fingernails down a blackboard.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on December 14, 2020, 05:29:19 AM
eg "The tin of scones were put away in the cupboard" - subject is tin - scones is the object of the prepositional phrase
it just jars
Also - use of comprise to mean composed of - "the team was comprised of..."
also - while i'm at it - incorrect use of apostrophes
esp leaving out the final s
"Marcus' hat took a beating"
In real life would you pronounce that without the double ess on the end? No. So add it in. Marcus's
These are all typos i see in the paper every day
I assume journalists are just stupid or they are paid 50c per word and the subeditor got sacked
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 14, 2020, 05:47:57 AM
Sausalito City Council candidates separated by single vote
marinij
Nov 20, 2020 — Incumbent Joan Cox, who lost her seat by one vote, requested the recount. Marin election office performs recount in Sausalito council race.
Post by: Dicey on December 14, 2020, 06:55:38 AM
I want "My vote doesn't count" to go away.I completely agree! There is a forumite who brags they have deliberately never voted and never intend to. It seems so incredibly arrogant. The least I can do as thanks for those who came before me is to exercise the right to vote for which they fought so hard and sacrificed so much.
Sausalito City Council candidates separated by single vote
marinij
Nov 20, 2020 — Incumbent Joan Cox, who lost her seat by one vote, requested the recount. Marin election office performs recount in Sausalito council race.
I worked several local campaigns so I was paying extra close attention to the results throughout the region. In the Bay Area, a number of candidates won/lost by razor thin margins.
Post by: BlueHouse on December 14, 2020, 08:55:11 AM
It really annoys me when people confuse subject/verb agreement
eg "The tin of scones were put away in the cupboard" - subject is tin - scones is the object of the prepositional phrase
it just jars
Also - use of comprise to mean composed of - "the team was comprised of..."
also - while i'm at it - incorrect use of apostrophes
esp leaving out the final s
"Marcus' hat took a beating"
In real life would you pronounce that without the double ess on the end? No. So add it in. Marcus's
These are all typos i see in the paper every day
I assume journalists are just stupid or they are paid 50c per word and the subeditor got sacked
There's a twitter account @nyttypos that corrects typos found in the NY Times. I followed for about 2 days and then wanted to reach through my screen and throttle the guy. I believe I may be cured from being so persnickety myself.
Post by: BlueHouse on December 14, 2020, 08:58:56 AM
@Dicey I think I've seen that same person. I always assumed that forum member was not a US citizen or resident, but I can no longer remember why I assumed that. I could be completely wrong. I agree that any US citizen that doesn't vote has no reason to be proud of it, but I can't say the same for other countries.I want "My vote doesn't count" to go away.I completely agree! There is a forumite who brags they have deliberately never voted and never intend to. It seems so incredibly arrogant. The least I can do as thanks for those who came before me is to exercise the right to vote for which they fought so hard and sacrificed so much.
Sausalito City Council candidates separated by single vote
marinij
Nov 20, 2020 — Incumbent Joan Cox, who lost her seat by one vote, requested the recount. Marin election office performs recount in Sausalito council race.
I worked several local campaigns so I was paying extra close attention to the results throughout the region. In the Bay Area, a number of candidates won/lost by razor thin margins.
Post by: SunnyDays on December 14, 2020, 10:03:00 AM
- Me and her/him as subjects of a sentence.
- I seen
- My wife and I's house.
- youse
As soon as I hear any of the above, I assume the person has no high school education. And then I find out they have a university degree. Head smack.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 14, 2020, 10:04:33 AM
@Dicey I think I've seen that same person. I always assumed that forum member was not a US citizen or resident, but I can no longer remember why I assumed that. I could be completely wrong. I agree that any US citizen that doesn't vote has no reason to be proud of it, but I can't say the same for other countries.I want "My vote doesn't count" to go away.I completely agree! There is a forumite who brags they have deliberately never voted and never intend to. It seems so incredibly arrogant. The least I can do as thanks for those who came before me is to exercise the right to vote for which they fought so hard and sacrificed so much.
Sausalito City Council candidates separated by single vote
marinij
Nov 20, 2020 — Incumbent Joan Cox, who lost her seat by one vote, requested the recount. Marin election office performs recount in Sausalito council race.
I worked several local campaigns so I was paying extra close attention to the results throughout the region. In the Bay Area, a number of candidates won/lost by razor thin margins.
When I think of what women went through to get the vote, I hate it when they voluntarily disenfranchise themselves.
Post by: simonsez on December 14, 2020, 10:13:16 AM
I also cannot abide seeing divine written as devine. Like fingernails down a blackboard.Definately agree with that one
Post by: GreenToTheCore on December 14, 2020, 12:08:30 PM
also - while i'm at it - incorrect use of apostrophes
esp leaving out the final s
"Marcus' hat took a beating"
In real life would you pronounce that without the double ess on the end? No. So add it in. Marcus's
These are all typos i see in the paper every day
I assume journalists are just stupid or they are paid 50c per word and the subeditor got sacked
This one gave me pause. It seems like it depends on what style guide you're using: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/apostrophe_introduction.html#:~:text=NOTE%3A%20the%20generally%20accepted%20convention,check%20the%20style%20guide%20of
Thoughts?
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 14, 2020, 01:24:56 PM
@Dicey I think I've seen that same person. I always assumed that forum member was not a US citizen or resident, but I can no longer remember why I assumed that. I could be completely wrong. I agree that any US citizen that doesn't vote has no reason to be proud of it, but I can't say the same for other countries.I want "My vote doesn't count" to go away.I completely agree! There is a forumite who brags they have deliberately never voted and never intend to. It seems so incredibly arrogant. The least I can do as thanks for those who came before me is to exercise the right to vote for which they fought so hard and sacrificed so much.
Sausalito City Council candidates separated by single vote
marinij
Nov 20, 2020 — Incumbent Joan Cox, who lost her seat by one vote, requested the recount. Marin election office performs recount in Sausalito council race.
I worked several local campaigns so I was paying extra close attention to the results throughout the region. In the Bay Area, a number of candidates won/lost by razor thin margins.
When I think of what women went through to get the vote, I hate it when they voluntarily disenfranchise themselves.
I don't know if this is possible in other countries, but in the UK if you think they're all crap (the usual reason given for not voting, in my experience), you can go and spoil your ballot. Because they're all paper ballots, you can write whatever you want on it and post it into the box. At the count, spoiled and ambiguous ballots are collected together and all the candidates stand round and examine them and agree together which ones count as a vote and which ones are spoiled and don't count as having expressed a preference. So you could write "You're all losers" and they would have to stand round and soberly nod their heads and agree that this voter doesn't seem to have expressed a clear preference.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on December 14, 2020, 01:35:50 PM
...I'll admit that even with my college education and general careful grammar, I still get regularly flummoxed by this one. <runs off to look it up> Ok, so when mixing nouns with pronouns, both owners require their own possessive form.
- My wife and I's house.
...
I really feel sorry for people who have to learn English as a second language.
Post by: SunnyDays on December 14, 2020, 02:35:46 PM
...I'll admit that even with my college education and general careful grammar, I still get regularly flummoxed by this one. <runs off to look it up> Ok, so when mixing nouns with pronouns, both owners require their own possessive form.
- My wife and I's house.
...
I really feel sorry for people who have to learn English as a second language.
An easy way to remember this kind of combination of possessives is “how would I say each one separately?” “My wife’s house” and “my house,” right? So then it’s “My wife’s and my house.” It’s easy, you just have to think a little ahead. This also works for pronouns. If you wouldn’t say “Her went to the store,” then you don’t say “Her and I went to the store.” However you would say each person individually is how you say them together.
Post by: MilesTeg on December 14, 2020, 02:50:36 PM
This datum is inconsistent with that other datum, but these data are consistent.
Similarly with strategy/stratagem.
Post by: Kris on December 14, 2020, 03:34:59 PM
Improper use of the word 'data'. Data is the plural of 'datum'.
This datum is inconsistent with that other datum, but these data are consistent.
Similarly with strategy/stratagem.
And criterion/criteria.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on December 14, 2020, 04:55:14 PM
also - while i'm at it - incorrect use of apostrophes
esp leaving out the final s
"Marcus' hat took a beating"
In real life would you pronounce that without the double ess on the end? No. So add it in. Marcus's
These are all typos i see in the paper every day
I assume journalists are just stupid or they are paid 50c per word and the subeditor got sacked
This one gave me pause. It seems like it depends on what style guide you're using: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/apostrophe_introduction.html#:~:text=NOTE%3A%20the%20generally%20accepted%20convention,check%20the%20style%20guide%20of
Thoughts?
It makes no sense to me to not add an S to the end of a singular proper noun (except for certain historical names). If I were to say James's hat or Marcus's hat in real life I would pronounce the double S and most people would too. I suspect the main reason journos now try to put away the S after the apostrophe is that it makes it easier to not make mistakes since it parallels the situation with plural nouns.
Post by: MilesTeg on December 14, 2020, 05:30:36 PM
Improper use of the word 'data'. Data is the plural of 'datum'.
This datum is inconsistent with that other datum, but these data are consistent.
Similarly with strategy/stratagem.
And criterion/criteria.
ahh yes another good example
Post by: Kris on December 14, 2020, 05:48:27 PM
Improper use of the word 'data'. Data is the plural of 'datum'.
This datum is inconsistent with that other datum, but these data are consistent.
Similarly with strategy/stratagem.
And criterion/criteria.
ahh yes another good example
That one drives me crazy because nine times out of ten, it’s used incorrectly.
Post by: Travis on December 14, 2020, 06:24:41 PM
...I'll admit that even with my college education and general careful grammar, I still get regularly flummoxed by this one. <runs off to look it up> Ok, so when mixing nouns with pronouns, both owners require their own possessive form.
- My wife and I's house.
...
I really feel sorry for people who have to learn English as a second language.
An easy way to remember this kind of combination of possessives is “how would I say each one separately?” “My wife’s house” and “my house,” right? So then it’s “My wife’s and my house.” It’s easy, you just have to think a little ahead. This also works for pronouns. If you wouldn’t say “Her went to the store,” then you don’t say “Her and I went to the store.” However you would say each person individually is how you say them together.
At the tender age of 30 I was put through a writing class while attending one of my military professional education courses. Every morning for an hour for six months we received what we learned to be 12th grade English curriculum taught by GWU professors and most of it was brand new material to most of us. We submitted writing samples before showing up to the course and I was graded as being one of the better writers; however, objectively I still sucked. The timing was perfect since a year later I would start grad school.
The textbook pointed out specifically that the rule is as you described - use pronouns in such a way that if you turned each into its own sentence it would still make sense. I became a certified grammar nazi after those lessons. It's disturbing when you consider we should have received these lessons as kids and never did.
Post by: Miss Piggy on December 14, 2020, 06:34:12 PM
Miss Piggy
She, Her, Hers
1-888-867-5309
misspiggy@whateverdomain.com
It's not the addition of the pronouns themselves that bothers me. Rather, it's the redundancy of adding multiple pronouns that basically all make the same "announcement" of the gender you prefer. If they all indicate the same gender, wouldn't one of them be enough? And recently, I saw a signature with a 4th "pronoun," but I can't recall what that 4th one was. I just remember thinking, "Wait...three wasn't enough?" Seriously, why not use just one?
Post by: Dollar Slice on December 14, 2020, 07:42:05 PM
It's not the addition of the pronouns themselves that bothers me. Rather, it's the redundancy of adding multiple pronouns that basically all make the same "announcement" of the gender you prefer. If they all indicate the same gender, wouldn't one of them be enough? And recently, I saw a signature with a 4th "pronoun," but I can't recall what that 4th one was. I just remember thinking, "Wait...three wasn't enough?" Seriously, why not use just one?
There is some logic behind this one! People who are cisgender who put she/her/hers or he/him/his are usually doing it to be an ally to people who don't have a conventional gender identity. You don't need a lesson in conjugating cisgender pronouns because you already know them. But if a person is, say, nonbinary, and uses other pronouns, like singular "they" or "ze", a lot of people will not know how to conjugate those pronouns (how many people know the possessive of "ze"?). So the convention is to list the full set, so that everyone (regardless of gender identity) can use the same template without having to answer extra questions or be called the wrong thing by accident.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 14, 2020, 08:41:14 PM
At the tender age of 30 I was put through a writing class while attending one of my military professional education courses. Every morning for an hour for six months we received what we learned to be 12th grade English curriculum taught by GWU professors and most of it was brand new material to most of us. We submitted writing samples before showing up to the course and I was graded as being one of the better writers; however, objectively I still sucked. The timing was perfect since a year later I would start grad school.
So much of my grading (CEGEP and University) was grammar. In my university department we did one session on basic grammar, and the students complained bitterly on the teacher evaluation. They were all honours students and they all needed it, some were so-so and some were terrible. They also had no conception of the need for editing. Edit for grammar, edit for content, edit for clarity, edit for flow, edit for redundancy. That part of teaching I do not miss.
Post by: SunnyDays on December 14, 2020, 08:47:31 PM
At the tender age of 30 I was put through a writing class while attending one of my military professional education courses. Every morning for an hour for six months we received what we learned to be 12th grade English curriculum taught by GWU professors and most of it was brand new material to most of us. We submitted writing samples before showing up to the course and I was graded as being one of the better writers; however, objectively I still sucked. The timing was perfect since a year later I would start grad school.
So much of my grading (CEGEP and University) was grammar. In my university department we did one session on basic grammar, and the students complained bitterly on the teacher evaluation. They were all honours students and they all needed it, some were so-so and some were terrible. They also had no conception of the need for editing. Edit for grammar, edit for content, edit for clarity, edit for flow, edit for redundancy. That part of teaching I do not miss.
So what is being taught in high school English? Basic grammar was part of about a grade 7 or 8 curriculum when I went to school. By grade 10, we were studying Shakespeare and God help you if you couldn’t write a grammatical sentence by that point!
Post by: Travis on December 14, 2020, 09:40:26 PM
At the tender age of 30 I was put through a writing class while attending one of my military professional education courses. Every morning for an hour for six months we received what we learned to be 12th grade English curriculum taught by GWU professors and most of it was brand new material to most of us. We submitted writing samples before showing up to the course and I was graded as being one of the better writers; however, objectively I still sucked. The timing was perfect since a year later I would start grad school.
So much of my grading (CEGEP and University) was grammar. In my university department we did one session on basic grammar, and the students complained bitterly on the teacher evaluation. They were all honours students and they all needed it, some were so-so and some were terrible. They also had no conception of the need for editing. Edit for grammar, edit for content, edit for clarity, edit for flow, edit for redundancy. That part of teaching I do not miss.
So what is being taught in high school English? Basic grammar was part of about a grade 7 or 8 curriculum when I went to school. By grade 10, we were studying Shakespear and God help you if you couldn’t write a grammatical sentence by that point!
High school English is a bit of a blur for me. I remember covering a lot of Shakespeare in 12th grade, but I don't remember any specific grammar classes. I had to peer-evaluate an essay in grad school where the student used a bunch of bulletized lists rather than paragraphs. Yeah, that was a head-scratcher.
Post by: Dicey on December 14, 2020, 11:33:55 PM
What a great word picture. Thanks for this explanation @shelivesthedream.@Dicey I think I've seen that same person. I always assumed that forum member was not a US citizen or resident, but I can no longer remember why I assumed that. I could be completely wrong. I agree that any US citizen that doesn't vote has no reason to be proud of it, but I can't say the same for other countries.I want "My vote doesn't count" to go away.I completely agree! There is a forumite who brags they have deliberately never voted and never intend to. It seems so incredibly arrogant. The least I can do as thanks for those who came before me is to exercise the right to vote for which they fought so hard and sacrificed so much.
Sausalito City Council candidates separated by single vote
marinij
Nov 20, 2020 — Incumbent Joan Cox, who lost her seat by one vote, requested the recount. Marin election office performs recount in Sausalito council race.
I worked several local campaigns so I was paying extra close attention to the results throughout the region. In the Bay Area, a number of candidates won/lost by razor thin margins.
When I think of what women went through to get the vote, I hate it when they voluntarily disenfranchise themselves.
I don't know if this is possible in other countries, but in the UK if you think they're all crap (the usual reason given for not voting, in my experience), you can go and spoil your ballot. Because they're all paper ballots, you can write whatever you want on it and post it into the box. At the count, spoiled and ambiguous ballots are collected together and all the candidates stand round and examine them and agree together which ones count as a vote and which ones are spoiled and don't count as having expressed a preference. So you could write "You're all losers" and they would have to stand round and soberly nod their heads and agree that this voter doesn't seem to have expressed a clear preference.
Post by: Morning Glory on December 15, 2020, 05:49:27 AM
At the tender age of 30 I was put through a writing class while attending one of my military professional education courses. Every morning for an hour for six months we received what we learned to be 12th grade English curriculum taught by GWU professors and most of it was brand new material to most of us. We submitted writing samples before showing up to the course and I was graded as being one of the better writers; however, objectively I still sucked. The timing was perfect since a year later I would start grad school.
So much of my grading (CEGEP and University) was grammar. In my university department we did one session on basic grammar, and the students complained bitterly on the teacher evaluation. They were all honours students and they all needed it, some were so-so and some were terrible. They also had no conception of the need for editing. Edit for grammar, edit for content, edit for clarity, edit for flow, edit for redundancy. That part of teaching I do not miss.
So what is being taught in high school English? Basic grammar was part of about a grade 7 or 8 curriculum when I went to school. By grade 10, we were studying Shakespear and God help you if you couldn’t write a grammatical sentence by that point!
Me too. I remember diagramming sentences in eighth grade. I wonder if they still do that? I also had Latin, which helped a lot.
My stepdad was a printer back in the day and had to copy edit upside down and backwards!! He used to show me mistakes in the newspaper all the time. Now every mistake just jumps out at me.
I teach nursing and about half of my students are decent writers when they come in. Occasionally I'll get one that's really good.
I've done peer review for a professional journal and seen some pretty horrible papers come through. There have been a couple that I turned down because I couldn't even tell what they were saying.
Post by: chaskavitch on December 15, 2020, 06:47:06 AM
At the tender age of 30 I was put through a writing class while attending one of my military professional education courses. Every morning for an hour for six months we received what we learned to be 12th grade English curriculum taught by GWU professors and most of it was brand new material to most of us. We submitted writing samples before showing up to the course and I was graded as being one of the better writers; however, objectively I still sucked. The timing was perfect since a year later I would start grad school.
So much of my grading (CEGEP and University) was grammar. In my university department we did one session on basic grammar, and the students complained bitterly on the teacher evaluation. They were all honours students and they all needed it, some were so-so and some were terrible. They also had no conception of the need for editing. Edit for grammar, edit for content, edit for clarity, edit for flow, edit for redundancy. That part of teaching I do not miss.
So what is being taught in high school English? Basic grammar was part of about a grade 7 or 8 curriculum when I went to school. By grade 10, we were studying Shakespear and God help you if you couldn’t write a grammatical sentence by that point!
Me too. I remember diagramming sentences in eighth grade. I wonder if they still do that? I also had Latin, which helped a lot.
My stepdad was a printer back in the day and had to copy edit upside down and backwards!! He used to show me mistakes in the newspaper all the time. Now every mistake just jumps out at me.
I teach nursing and about half of my students are decent writers when they come in. Occasionally I'll get one that's really good.
I've done peer review for a professional journal and seen some pretty horrible papers come through. There have been a couple that I turned down because I couldn't even tell what they were saying.
Ohhhh, no. No, they don't do that in a lot of schools anymore.
I was homeschooled through elementary, and I could diagram and label every word in a compound complex sentence in 5th grade.
I went to public school in 1998 for 8th grade - we did DOL (Daily Oral Language) on the whiteboard every day before English. It was such simple exercises. Finding all of the verbs in a 3-sentence paragraph one day, nouns and adjectives another, etc. I actually remember complaining to my mom that it was too easy and I didn't understand why we were even doing it.
I'm not saying my grammar is as good as it should be, just that I know there is a lot missing from our public education curriculum.
In that vein, am I supposed to put two periods after "etc.", since it is an abbreviation and the end of a sentence? It just looks weird.
Post by: Morning Glory on December 15, 2020, 07:25:24 AM
Post by: chaskavitch on December 15, 2020, 07:30:13 AM
In APA format you only use etc. within a parenthetical statement. You spell out "et cetera" otherwise, therefore avoiding the two period problem. Same for other abbreviations. I don't know about the other formats, they confuse me.
Well that makes a lot of sense :) Thank you!
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on December 15, 2020, 08:00:53 AM
That was in Year 7 English
Then Year 11 linguistics we learnt terms like assonance, phonology, phonetics, register etc and that also made my understanding of language better
But even in year 2 English I remember learning phonics - ie how to spell
I think these days there is a reluctance to boil language teaching down to nuts and bolts and it's a real shame b/c nuts and bolts are where style comes from - you can't have fair and creativity in your writing without mastering the basics of parts of speech, subject-verb agreement, clause construction, sentence weighting, and so on
Post by: zolotiyeruki on December 15, 2020, 02:47:37 PM
Right, but it doesn't apply the same way when it's two nouns, e.g. "Mike and Barb's house" vs a noun and a pronoun "Mary's and my house". I think I have it now, but man, English is hard....I'll admit that even with my college education and general careful grammar, I still get regularly flummoxed by this one. <runs off to look it up> Ok, so when mixing nouns with pronouns, both owners require their own possessive form.
- My wife and I's house.
...
I really feel sorry for people who have to learn English as a second language.
An easy way to remember this kind of combination of possessives is “how would I say each one separately?” “My wife’s house” and “my house,” right? So then it’s “My wife’s and my house.” It’s easy, you just have to think a little ahead. This also works for pronouns. If you wouldn’t say “Her went to the store,” then you don’t say “Her and I went to the store.” However you would say each person individually is how you say them together.
Quote
Improper use of the word 'data'. Data is the plural of 'datum'.Sadly, the ship has kinda sailed on this one. "Data" has morphed into an uncountable noun (like "water", "sand", "space", etc.).
Post by: HPstache on December 15, 2020, 03:04:24 PM
Improper use of the word 'data'. Data is the plural of 'datum'.
This datum is inconsistent with that other datum, but these data are consistent.
Similarly with strategy/stratagem.
Interesting. I did not know that about data vs. datum. It's particularly interesting because my definition of datum as one who works in 3D CAD all day has nothing to do with a plurality of data, but rather a plane in 3 dimensional space.
Post by: SunnyDays on December 15, 2020, 03:25:03 PM
I also wonder if there’s a difference between American and Commonwealth countrys’ curricula? (See, that’s the plural of curriculum, just like data/datum!). Or just old school versus new school. I’ll have to ask my teacher neighbours what their kids are learning.
Post by: ixtap on December 15, 2020, 03:29:50 PM
In the same vein, it also bugs me when people don’t know the difference between an adjective and an adverb. So many times, I hear people use the former when they should use the latter, as in “he did that perfect” instead of “perfectly.” It just seems so simple to me that I don’t understand why people don’t know it.
I also wonder if there’s a difference between American and Commonwealth countrys’ curricula? (See, that’s the plural of curriculum, just like data/datum!). Or just old school versus new school. I’ll have to ask my teacher neighbours what their kids are learning.
How we speak is more influenced by those around us than by what we learn about grammar in a classroom. I have a few verbal quirks that I have picked up from around the country. Some are useful, like y'all and all y'all.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on December 15, 2020, 03:41:10 PM
In the same vein, it also bugs me when people don’t know the difference between an adjective and an adverb. So many times, I hear people use the former when they should use the latter, as in “he did that perfect” instead of “perfectly.” It just seems so simple to me that I don’t understand why people don’t know it.
I also wonder if there’s a difference between American and Commonwealth countrys’ curricula? (See, that’s the plural of curriculum, just like data/datum!). Or just old school versus new school. I’ll have to ask my teacher neighbours what their kids are learning.
I went to school in the States and the English teaching was amazing. So focussed on grammar and mechanics and good, proper writing.
English teaching here in Australia is complete shit. You're encouraged to critically analyse texts' themes etc blah blah (not a bad thing of itself) but there's no attention paid to mechanics. We weren't even taught what an adverb or a preposition is. No focus on sentence building. Just mushy liberal values and critical analysis. Again, nothing wrong with that, but you have to walk before you can run.
Post by: GreenToTheCore on December 15, 2020, 04:44:42 PM
Me too. I remember diagramming sentences in eighth grade. I wonder if they still do that? I also had Latin, which helped a lot.Sentence diagraming was in 8th grade for me, too. Although, I think it started in 4th grade. We had to memorize all the prepositions (the test was a long numbered list and we had to fill it in) and quite a few root words and affixes.
Anyone else remember watching educational videos on root woods with a host who had a pretty impressive 70's man-perm?
Post by: Morning Glory on December 15, 2020, 04:56:12 PM
I don't remember what we did before 8th grade. I switched schools that year so maybe that's why I remember. The teacher must have made an impression. I remember a lot of the other kids didn't understand the diagramming, and I thought it was easier than writing papers.Me too. I remember diagramming sentences in eighth grade. I wonder if they still do that? I also had Latin, which helped a lot.Sentence diagraming was in 8th grade for me, too. Although, I think it started in 4th grade. We had to memorize all the prepositions (the test was a long numbered list and we had to fill it in) and quite a few root words and affixes.
Anyone else remember watching educational videos on root woods with a host who had a pretty impressive 70's man-perm?
I've gotten a bit sloppy over the years, especially when typing on the phone.
Post by: GreenToTheCore on December 15, 2020, 05:50:01 PM
I remember a lot of the other kids didn't understand the diagramming, and I thought it was easier than writing papers.
Agreed, it was my favorite part :) Other than our teacher demonstrating iambic pentameter by playing the bongos...Mr. Wenz was a great teacher.
Post by: GreenToTheCore on December 15, 2020, 05:51:53 PM
True, easy enough to add it. It tough when different teachers would mark you off for going against their preferred style.also - while i'm at it - incorrect use of apostrophes
esp leaving out the final s
"Marcus' hat took a beating"
In real life would you pronounce that without the double ess on the end? No. So add it in. Marcus's
These are all typos i see in the paper every day
I assume journalists are just stupid or they are paid 50c per word and the subeditor got sacked
This one gave me pause. It seems like it depends on what style guide you're using: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/apostrophe_introduction.html#:~:text=NOTE%3A%20the%20generally%20accepted%20convention,check%20the%20style%20guide%20of
Thoughts?
It makes no sense to me to not add an S to the end of a singular proper noun (except for certain historical names). If I were to say James's hat or Marcus's hat in real life I would pronounce the double S and most people would too. I suspect the main reason journos now try to put away the S after the apostrophe is that it makes it easier to not make mistakes since it parallels the situation with plural nouns.
Post by: Miss Piggy on December 15, 2020, 06:43:26 PM
It's not the addition of the pronouns themselves that bothers me. Rather, it's the redundancy of adding multiple pronouns that basically all make the same "announcement" of the gender you prefer. If they all indicate the same gender, wouldn't one of them be enough? And recently, I saw a signature with a 4th "pronoun," but I can't recall what that 4th one was. I just remember thinking, "Wait...three wasn't enough?" Seriously, why not use just one?
There is some logic behind this one! People who are cisgender who put she/her/hers or he/him/his are usually doing it to be an ally to people who don't have a conventional gender identity. You don't need a lesson in conjugating cisgender pronouns because you already know them. But if a person is, say, nonbinary, and uses other pronouns, like singular "they" or "ze", a lot of people will not know how to conjugate those pronouns (how many people know the possessive of "ze"?). So the convention is to list the full set, so that everyone (regardless of gender identity) can use the same template without having to answer extra questions or be called the wrong thing by accident.
Okay, wait a second @Dollar Slice...what the heck is "ze"? Seriously, I have never seen or heard that. (I'm in the US Midwest, and we are generally behind the times with new trends...is this a new thing?)
Post by: Dollar Slice on December 15, 2020, 07:14:34 PM
It's not the addition of the pronouns themselves that bothers me. Rather, it's the redundancy of adding multiple pronouns that basically all make the same "announcement" of the gender you prefer. If they all indicate the same gender, wouldn't one of them be enough? And recently, I saw a signature with a 4th "pronoun," but I can't recall what that 4th one was. I just remember thinking, "Wait...three wasn't enough?" Seriously, why not use just one?
There is some logic behind this one! People who are cisgender who put she/her/hers or he/him/his are usually doing it to be an ally to people who don't have a conventional gender identity. You don't need a lesson in conjugating cisgender pronouns because you already know them. But if a person is, say, nonbinary, and uses other pronouns, like singular "they" or "ze", a lot of people will not know how to conjugate those pronouns (how many people know the possessive of "ze"?). So the convention is to list the full set, so that everyone (regardless of gender identity) can use the same template without having to answer extra questions or be called the wrong thing by accident.
Okay, wait a second @Dollar Slice...what the heck is "ze"? Seriously, I have never seen or heard that. (I'm in the US Midwest, and we are generally behind the times with new trends...is this a new thing?)
It's not very common, but it's been around for a while. It's a gender-neutral pronoun that some people who don't identify as either "he" or "she" prefer to use. I suspect it's not commonly used because so few people have heard of it that it would make one's life very tedious, having to constantly explain it.
Post by: sui generis on December 15, 2020, 08:56:55 PM
It's not the addition of the pronouns themselves that bothers me. Rather, it's the redundancy of adding multiple pronouns that basically all make the same "announcement" of the gender you prefer. If they all indicate the same gender, wouldn't one of them be enough? And recently, I saw a signature with a 4th "pronoun," but I can't recall what that 4th one was. I just remember thinking, "Wait...three wasn't enough?" Seriously, why not use just one?
There is some logic behind this one! People who are cisgender who put she/her/hers or he/him/his are usually doing it to be an ally to people who don't have a conventional gender identity. You don't need a lesson in conjugating cisgender pronouns because you already know them. But if a person is, say, nonbinary, and uses other pronouns, like singular "they" or "ze", a lot of people will not know how to conjugate those pronouns (how many people know the possessive of "ze"?). So the convention is to list the full set, so that everyone (regardless of gender identity) can use the same template without having to answer extra questions or be called the wrong thing by accident.
Okay, wait a second @Dollar Slice...what the heck is "ze"? Seriously, I have never seen or heard that. (I'm in the US Midwest, and we are generally behind the times with new trends...is this a new thing?)
It's not very common, but it's been around for a while. It's a gender-neutral pronoun that some people who don't identify as either "he" or "she" prefer to use. I suspect it's not commonly used because so few people have heard of it that it would make one's life very tedious, having to constantly explain it.
Agree with this last. I volunteer with several groups where you always introduce yourself with pronouns (or we all change our names on zoom to First Last (Pronouns)) and I have yet to see anyone use ze, zir, etc. Other than the ones you'd guess, the most common is that people use they, their or sometimes indicate flexibility, e.g. " she/they".
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 16, 2020, 02:35:59 AM
I also wonder if there’s a difference between American and Commonwealth countrys’ curricula? (See, that’s the plural of curriculum, just like data/datum!). Or just old school versus new school. I’ll have to ask my teacher neighbours what their kids are learning.
I only found out what diagramming a sentence is when it was used so repeatedly and confusingly in an American book I read as an adult that I had to look it up. I still don't really understand the point. I mean, I kind of do, but it still seems like a really weird activity.
We were taught the names of what I would consider basic grammatical concepts, both in English classes and in compulsory foreign language classes: nouns, verbs, adjectives, tenses, etc. We were also taught formal punctuation rules. Then we moved on to literary techniques and themes: alliteration, foreshadowing, tone, etc. I feel like I had an adequate grounding in grammar without it being burdensome.
I'm 30, FWIW.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on December 16, 2020, 04:46:52 AM
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 16, 2020, 06:08:17 AM
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on December 16, 2020, 06:23:58 AM
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 16, 2020, 07:32:13 AM
Someone misspelled "capable."
I haven't seen it until a few minutes ago.
Post by: iris lily on December 16, 2020, 07:48:13 AM
Just seems like overkill...?
I always liked diagramming sentences in high school and I agree that it cements principles of language composition if you know how to diagram a sentence. In college we touched on this thing called transformational grammar that seem to me to be diagramming on steroids. I don’t remember why I did that and what it was for, I just remember thinking wow people can get PhD’s in this shit, it is complex.
Are there any aficionados of transformational grammar and diagramming here? You could probably explain it better than I can, I have only a vague memory of it.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 16, 2020, 10:38:02 AM
I'm weary of "porch pirates," a euphemism for the thieves who steal parcels left on porches or near front doors.
Post by: Kris on December 16, 2020, 10:44:29 AM
I HATE euphemisms.
I'm weary of "porch pirates," a euphemism for the thieves who steal parcels left on porches or near front doors.
I mean, yeah, I guess? But I don't think people are using that term because they want to soften the concept. They use it because it's a particular type of thief and it's easier to say.
"Be careful of porch pirates" is much quicker and more evocative to say than, "Be careful, there's a rash of thieves in the neighborhood who steal parcels left on porches or near front doors."
Post by: nereo on December 16, 2020, 01:40:48 PM
I HATE euphemisms.
I'm weary of "porch pirates," a euphemism for the thieves who steal parcels left on porches or near front doors.
Funny - I don't consider "porch pirate" to be a euphemism at all, just an apt description of a particular kind of larceny. Like Kris said - it's an alliterative way of describing something very specific, quickly. Doesn't seem to 'soften' or downplay the act at all. Like 'pick-pockets.'
Post by: sui generis on December 16, 2020, 02:04:56 PM
I HATE euphemisms.
I'm weary of "porch pirates," a euphemism for the thieves who steal parcels left on porches or near front doors.
Funny - I don't consider "porch pirate" to be a euphemism at all, just an apt description of a particular kind of larceny. Like Kris said - it's an alliterative way of describing something very specific, quickly. Doesn't seem to 'soften' or downplay the act at all. Like 'pick-pockets.'
Yeah, without being too pedantic, "pirate" is actually a much worse term than "thief" in that pirates currently and historically often commit much more horrific crimes than just thieving. So it's possibly the opposite of a euphemism.
Post by: nereo on December 16, 2020, 02:08:48 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_TSR_v07m0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_TSR_v07m0)
*ha! that's his real name... making videos about tricking robbers.
Post by: Jouer on December 17, 2020, 07:37:58 AM
Using proper grammar and annunciation as a child got comments like this, "oh look at buddy thinks he's right proper. Thinks he's better than me. Look at the king of England over there!"
And that was just from my parents. Sigh. So for many of us, myself included, our grammar sucks.
Post by: jambongris on December 17, 2020, 08:22:17 AM
Mark Rober's* Porch Pirate glitter-bomb videos are entertainingThere’s a version 3.0 that he just put out on YouTube. His whole channel is pretty interesting, he used to work at NASA on the Mars rovers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_TSR_v07m0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_TSR_v07m0)
*ha! that's his real name... making videos about tricking robbers.
Post by: BlueHouse on December 17, 2020, 08:35:59 AM
Post by: iris lily on December 17, 2020, 09:29:25 AM
pretty sure this was mentioned at least 20 pages ago, but I'm hearing more and more people talk about how they "conversate" with others.Oh that’s interesting — funny! Have not heard that.
Well, I guess I can conversate with my friend as we “recreate” in our Victorian walking park.
The Victorians “recreated.”
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 17, 2020, 09:55:15 AM
pretty sure this was mentioned at least 20 pages ago, but I'm hearing more and more people talk about how they "conversate" with others.Oh that’s interesting — funny! Have not heard that.
Well, I guess I can conversate with my friend as we “recreate” in our Victorian walking park.
The Victorians “recreated.”
Every time I see recreate I think of it as creating again, not as partaking in recreation. Then my brain does the little translation.
This discussion of language is so interesting to me, especially the regional differences. I grew up in Newfoundland. It was so confusing learning proper English in school but not being able to use it in practice without ridicule. It was even more confusing learning to annunciate in music classes which seemed so exaggerated relative to our usual way of speaking.
Using proper grammar and annunciation as a child got comments like this, "oh look at buddy thinks he's right proper. Thinks he's better than me. Look at the king of England over there!"
And that was just from my parents. Sigh. So for many of us, myself included, our grammar sucks.
When I was a kid people used to ask if I was British. Born in Montreal, 5th generation Canadian, so definitely not British. I guess I was also enunciiating too well? ;-)
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 17, 2020, 10:02:38 AM
Deck the halls - I put on my gay apparel and troll the ancient Yuletide carol. I thought people used to troll when they went fishing. And now they go fishing on the internet to annoy people instead.
I really miss the old meaning of gay, there is no other one word that expresses happy and light-hearted and giddy and being just full of the joy of life. However, it's gone. :-(
Post by: solon on December 17, 2020, 10:36:27 AM
Wal-Mart
WalMart
It's just Walmart.
Post by: nereo on December 17, 2020, 10:45:08 AM
pretty sure this was mentioned at least 20 pages ago, but I'm hearing more and more people talk about how they "conversate" with others.Oh that’s interesting — funny! Have not heard that.
Well, I guess I can conversate with my friend as we “recreate” in our Victorian walking park.
The Victorians “recreated.”
Since you mentioned it...
I’ve never liked the use of “holiday” to mean “taking a trip or vacation”. Holiday comes from Holy Day. As in: a religious observance. ‘Secular holiday” is an oxymoron. Telling people “my mates and I went on holiday to Las Vegas” sounds like sacrilege to me (or a very strange religion).
Post by: nereo on December 17, 2020, 10:47:07 AM
When I was a kid people used to ask if I was British. Born in Montreal, 5th generation Canadian, so definitely not British. I guess I was also enunciiating too well? ;-)
Ironically, about a third of people from the US will still conclude you are British if you tell them you are 5th generation Canadian
:-P
Post by: sui generis on December 17, 2020, 12:03:13 PM
pretty sure this was mentioned at least 20 pages ago, but I'm hearing more and more people talk about how they "conversate" with others.Oh that’s interesting — funny! Have not heard that.
Well, I guess I can conversate with my friend as we “recreate” in our Victorian walking park.
The Victorians “recreated.”
Since you mentioned it...
I’ve never liked the use of “holiday” to mean “taking a trip or vacation”. Holiday comes from Holy Day. As in: a religious observance. ‘Secular holiday” is an oxymoron. Telling people “my mates and I went on holiday to Las Vegas” sounds like sacrilege to me (or a very strange religion).
What about "holiday" used to mean a day off of work? Like Columbus Day is a "holiday" for some workplaces and not others, meaning some employers let you have the day off and some don't, obviously it's not religious at all. Is there a different word that you think should be used for those days? (Or maybe something super obvious that I'm forgetting?)
Post by: nereo on December 17, 2020, 12:33:51 PM
pretty sure this was mentioned at least 20 pages ago, but I'm hearing more and more people talk about how they "conversate" with others.Oh that’s interesting — funny! Have not heard that.
Well, I guess I can conversate with my friend as we “recreate” in our Victorian walking park.
The Victorians “recreated.”
Since you mentioned it...
I’ve never liked the use of “holiday” to mean “taking a trip or vacation”. Holiday comes from Holy Day. As in: a religious observance. ‘Secular holiday” is an oxymoron. Telling people “my mates and I went on holiday to Las Vegas” sounds like sacrilege to me (or a very strange religion).
What about "holiday" used to mean a day off of work? Like Columbus Day is a "holiday" for some workplaces and not others, meaning some employers let you have the day off and some don't, obviously it's not religious at all. Is there a different word that you think should be used for those days? (Or maybe something super obvious that I'm forgetting?)
Right. As I said, calling Columbus Day a ‘holiday’ is an oxymoron (unless you feel Christopher Columbus is a saint or something). Problem is we haven’t developed a great alternative word for a day off that’s not for religious observance. A “Labor Day” might work if we hadn’t already devoted a specific day off in September.
I know in the UK they use ‘Banking Days’ (or: Bank Holiday - which works I suppose if you worship at the alter of capitalism).
But I’m more talking about the word used as an action (“I went on holiday” rather than “I went on vacation” or “I went on a trip”). There’s nothing holy about most people’s trips, and you aren’t observing the day in question - particularly if you don’t go on an actual federal holiday.
Post by: Paul der Krake on December 17, 2020, 01:12:27 PM
"James is on holiday in Spain, he's not going to make this meeting".
No religious or mandatory state day off connotation whatsoever.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 17, 2020, 04:59:38 PM
Going on holiday means going on vacation in England. You know, where English originated.
"James is on holiday in Spain, he's not going to make this meeting".
No religious or mandatory state day off connotation whatsoever.
The original holy day is built in. Most vacation days historically were holy days, so its not surprising to see the shift. It's a lot less of a shift than gay. Are you all too young to miss gay?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 17, 2020, 05:03:13 PM
When I was a kid people used to ask if I was British. Born in Montreal, 5th generation Canadian, so definitely not British. I guess I was also enunciiating too well? ;-)
Ironically, about a third of people from the US will still conclude you are British if you tell them you are 5th generation Canadian
:-P
My Irish and Scots ancestors would rise up from the grave and smite them. And if my name was Tremblay?
Post by: nereo on December 17, 2020, 05:16:02 PM
Going on holiday means going on vacation in England. You know, where English originated.
"James is on holiday in Spain, he's not going to make this meeting".
No religious or mandatory state day off connotation whatsoever.
Nope and nope. If one’s to argue language origin as some sort of certificate of authenticity, that goes to what is now Germany (where the Anglos, Jutes and Saxons of old-English came from - and from which the word England is derived (“land of the Angles”)), not Great Britain. The British of course were instrumental in spreading the English language across the globe, but modern English has only a passive resemblance to what was spoken four centuries ago. Shakespeare’s a good barometer of how far the language has drifted (coinciding with colonization and the spread of ‘English’ all over the globe). Now the overwhelming majority of English speakers live outside England, and its been that way for over 200 years. Unlike French, there’s no single organization that monitors and enforces ‘proper’ English.
Regardless of its usage in some corners of this planet, the etymology of holiday remains holy day. I find that annoying when used to mean ‘on vacation’ as well as the non-sensical term ‘secular holiday’. Which is the subject of this thread. You can disagree, and that’s fine. The whole point of this thread (if there is one) is that some words and phrases have come into usage which others don’t like.
Post by: yakamashii on December 17, 2020, 05:36:03 PM
Christmas songs are interesting examples of changes in word usage.
Deck the halls - I put on my gay apparel and troll the ancient Yuletide carol. I thought people used to troll when they went fishing. And now they go fishing on the internet to annoy people instead.
I really miss the old meaning of gay, there is no other one word that expresses happy and light-hearted and giddy and being just full of the joy of life. However, it's gone. :-(
Exuberant? Vivacious? Buoyant?
Post by: Paul der Krake on December 17, 2020, 05:44:53 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 17, 2020, 06:11:07 PM
Christmas songs are interesting examples of changes in word usage.
Deck the halls - I put on my gay apparel and troll the ancient Yuletide carol. I thought people used to troll when they went fishing. And now they go fishing on the internet to annoy people instead.
I really miss the old meaning of gay, there is no other one word that expresses happy and light-hearted and giddy and being just full of the joy of life. However, it's gone. :-(
Exuberant? Vivacious? Buoyant?
Sort of but not really. We really did lose a disginct word.
Post by: sui generis on December 17, 2020, 06:58:41 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on December 18, 2020, 05:54:37 AM
Just listened to this podcast today and the end, especially, is *so pertinent* to this thread. Take a listen or Ctrol+F for McWhorter to read the on-point section in the transcript: https://www.npr.org/2018/07/19/630482636/radio-replay-watch-your-mouth
GREAT find!! Thanks for sharing!
Post by: yakamashii on December 18, 2020, 07:21:15 AM
Christmas songs are interesting examples of changes in word usage.
Deck the halls - I put on my gay apparel and troll the ancient Yuletide carol. I thought people used to troll when they went fishing. And now they go fishing on the internet to annoy people instead.
I really miss the old meaning of gay, there is no other one word that expresses happy and light-hearted and giddy and being just full of the joy of life. However, it's gone. :-(
Exuberant? Vivacious? Buoyant?
Sort of but not really. We really did lose a disginct word.
Man, I simply have to disagree. Your "gay" is my "exuberant" to a tee.
Post by: nereo on December 18, 2020, 07:58:17 AM
Christmas songs are interesting examples of changes in word usage.
Deck the halls - I put on my gay apparel and troll the ancient Yuletide carol. I thought people used to troll when they went fishing. And now they go fishing on the internet to annoy people instead.
I really miss the old meaning of gay, there is no other one word that expresses happy and light-hearted and giddy and being just full of the joy of life. However, it's gone. :-(
Exuberant? Vivacious? Buoyant?
Sort of but not really. We really did lose a disginct word.
Man, I simply have to disagree. Your "gay" is my "exuberant" to a tee.
For me, “exuberant” is an ephemeral emotion - “I was exuberant after my first kiss”. Gay is... something less pronounced but often longer-lasting. The general attitude of someone might be gay, whereas they are exuberant in the moment.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 18, 2020, 08:29:14 AM
Christmas songs are interesting examples of changes in word usage.
Deck the halls - I put on my gay apparel and troll the ancient Yuletide carol. I thought people used to troll when they went fishing. And now they go fishing on the internet to annoy people instead.
I really miss the old meaning of gay, there is no other one word that expresses happy and light-hearted and giddy and being just full of the joy of life. However, it's gone. :-(
Exuberant? Vivacious? Buoyant?
Sort of but not really. We really did lose a disginct word.
Man, I simply have to disagree. Your "gay" is my "exuberant" to a tee.
For me, “exuberant” is an ephemeral emotion - “I was exuberant after my first kiss”. Gay is... something less pronounced but often longer-lasting. The general attitude of someone might be gay, whereas they are exuberant in the moment.
Dictionary : lighthearted and carefree. Not sure carefree is a big component since one can have cares and still feel gay, but it's pretty good. So not as ephemeral and energetic as exuberant. For me it is sort of like sparkling inside.
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 18, 2020, 12:08:42 PM
Post by: yakamashii on December 18, 2020, 05:32:53 PM
Christmas songs are interesting examples of changes in word usage.
Deck the halls - I put on my gay apparel and troll the ancient Yuletide carol. I thought people used to troll when they went fishing. And now they go fishing on the internet to annoy people instead.
I really miss the old meaning of gay, there is no other one word that expresses happy and light-hearted and giddy and being just full of the joy of life. However, it's gone. :-(
Exuberant? Vivacious? Buoyant?
Sort of but not really. We really did lose a disginct word.
Man, I simply have to disagree. Your "gay" is my "exuberant" to a tee.
For me, “exuberant” is an ephemeral emotion - “I was exuberant after my first kiss”. Gay is... something less pronounced but often longer-lasting. The general attitude of someone might be gay, whereas they are exuberant in the moment.
Dictionary : lighthearted and carefree. Not sure carefree is a big component since one can have cares and still feel gay, but it's pretty good. So not as ephemeral and energetic as exuberant. For me it is sort of like sparkling inside.
H'mmm. I have the exact opposite sense of exuberant vs gay. "I feel pretty and witty and gay" (Maria doesn't feel that way at the end of the Story), "Don we now our gay apparel" (and doff it when the wassailing concludes, I presume), "carousels whirring to gay dancing tunes" and so on make "gay" sound transient to me, whereas "exuberant" is more like a character trait (ETA: I think "exuberant" can also be used to describe an ephemeral emotion, hence my opinion that it's a good stand-in for Retiredat63's notion of "gay.") I'll note that I've never heard this version of "gay" outside song lyrics or lines from old musicals or plays, whereas "exuberant" is all over the place IRL.
Let me ask you this: Have you seen the movie Elf? Buddy (and real-world people like him) are what I'm thinking when I suggest that "gay" maps to "exuberant."
Interesting how our interpretations differ. Guess that's what makes the world go 'round.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 19, 2020, 07:48:04 AM
Interesting how our interpretations differ. Guess that's what makes the world go 'round.
"Variety is the spice of life."
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 19, 2020, 07:51:05 AM
Someone misspelled "donor."
Post by: Morning Glory on December 19, 2020, 08:08:14 AM
Post by: sui generis on December 19, 2020, 09:07:42 AM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on December 19, 2020, 12:41:40 PM
That's how I feel when I hear people add an extra i to mischievous. I think the vast majority of people pronounce it miss-CHEE-vee-us and I'm not sure how that got started. Frankly I wish we could just officially change the spelling so at least it would make sense.Growing up, I mispronounced it all the time. I was rather disappointed when I learned that it didn't have the extra "i." To me, the extra "i" makes it sound similar to "devious," and makes the word that much more delicious.
Post by: sui generis on December 19, 2020, 01:43:20 PM
That's how I feel when I hear people add an extra i to mischievous. I think the vast majority of people pronounce it miss-CHEE-vee-us and I'm not sure how that got started. Frankly I wish we could just officially change the spelling so at least it would make sense.Growing up, I mispronounced it all the time. I was rather disappointed when I learned that it didn't have the extra "i." To me, the extra "i" makes it sound similar to "devious," and makes the word that much more delicious.
TBH, same here. I prefer that pronunciation, but feel obligated not to pronounce it that way. If I ran the world, I'd just wave my pinky and it would be "michievious" in all the dictionaries right now.
Post by: marble_faun on December 19, 2020, 09:36:58 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 20, 2020, 09:32:40 PM
To me, the older sense of gay has a connotation of being freewheeling and almost a little drunk on delight with life. There are particular times to be gay (like the holidays, when people are "merry and gay" and wear "gay apparel" or when you have just fallen in love, like Maria from West Side Story). "Gay" is a kind of heightened state, apart from normal existence.
Maria, and Nellie Forbush (South Pacific)
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 26, 2020, 12:05:16 PM
!!!!! HAPPY NEW YEAR !!!!!
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 26, 2020, 12:12:28 PM
Growing up, I mispronounced [mischievous] all the time.
Mea culpa!
!!!!! HAPPY NEW YEAR !!!!!
Post by: nereo on December 26, 2020, 01:53:51 PM
"Redue," a misspelling of "redo," is today's entry in the file of misspellings.
I think “redue” should be our new term for when you renew a library book (or similar)
“ your book is now redue on January 12th”
Post by: meghan88 on December 26, 2020, 04:36:14 PM
"Needs done" or any variant of that pattern. "These dogs need walked." "The grass needs mowed."
Awful.
I searched back to 2018 for the quote above, as I wanted to make sure I wasn't bringing this up for the first time. "Needs cleaned" is, to me, like nails on a chalkboard. Something may need cleaning, or it may need to be cleaned, but nothing on this planet should ever, ever "needs cleaned". I first heard it in Southwestern Ontario and I think it's also a thing in the Midwest?
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on December 26, 2020, 04:41:32 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 26, 2020, 05:03:45 PM
This is not a 'mistake' but it annoys me how Americans pronounce a flat "oo" sound in nuclear, new, renew, etc
Accents are so variable, let's not go there.
However, since we are there fo a moment, I just want to say that Canadians do not pronounce "about" like "aboot". The only time we say "aboot" is when we are saying "a boot".
Post by: iluvzbeach on December 26, 2020, 05:19:57 PM
This is not a 'mistake' but it annoys me how Americans pronounce a flat "oo" sound in nuclear, new, renew, etc
I’m perplexed at this one...how would you pronounce them? Genuinely curious.
Post by: Kris on December 26, 2020, 06:08:31 PM
This is not a 'mistake' but it annoys me how Americans pronounce a flat "oo" sound in nuclear, new, renew, etc
I’m perplexed at this one...how would you pronounce them? Genuinely curious.
Non-Americans would pronounce these words as “NYEW-clear, NYEW, re-NYEW.”
I can understand how the flat “oo” would be irritating.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 26, 2020, 07:15:34 PM
This is not a 'mistake' but it annoys me how Americans pronounce a flat "oo" sound in nuclear, new, renew, etc
I’m perplexed at this one...how would you pronounce them? Genuinely curious.
Canadians have regional accents but not big ones - we basically speak CBC English. CBC radio and later TV was a unifying linguistic force across the country. Nuclear does not have a flat "oo" but not quite as pronounced as "nwey". Maybe "new"?
Bloop bloop is an Aussie, although as a high income lawyer I doubt g'day mate is part of his regular vocabulary. ;-)
Post by: nereo on December 27, 2020, 05:28:45 AM
As an American who closely observed Canadians, I’d say this is generally true from British Columbia through Ontario. The maritimes get particularly unique with their regional dialects, with parts of Newfoundland and Labrador so different that they took a fair bit of effort to understand.This is not a 'mistake' but it annoys me how Americans pronounce a flat "oo" sound in nuclear, new, renew, etc
I’m perplexed at this one...how would you pronounce them? Genuinely curious.
Canadians have regional accents but not big ones - we basically speak CBC English. CBC radio and later TV was a unifying linguistic force across the country. Nuclear does not have a flat "oo" but not quite as pronounced as "nwey". Maybe "new"?
Bloop bloop is an Aussie, although as a high income lawyer I doubt g'day mate is part of his regular vocabulary. ;-)
There is also the francophone debate about the French spoken by eight million Québécois. It’s certainly not the French spoken by Parisians, much as the English spoken in Ireland is different from how it is spoken in California. Which is more “correct” will never be established.
The overwhelming majority of Canadians live west of the maritimes.
Post by: Travis on December 27, 2020, 06:08:39 AM
There is also the francophone debate about the French spoken by eight million Québécois. It’s certainly not the French spoken by Parisians, much as the English spoken in Ireland is different from how it is spoken in California.
There's a WWII movie called Monument Men where a group of art experts become soldiers to preserve Europe's art/monuments/history towards the end of the war. Matt Damon plays a soldier who amongst his group is the only one with even the slightest experience in French. It's a running joke that every time he opens his mouth the French person asks "where did you learn to speak French?" He says "Ottawa." The French person laughs and says "let's just stick with English."
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on December 27, 2020, 06:33:42 AM
This is not a 'mistake' but it annoys me how Americans pronounce a flat "oo" sound in nuclear, new, renew, etc
I’m perplexed at this one...how would you pronounce them? Genuinely curious.
Canadians have regional accents but not big ones - we basically speak CBC English. CBC radio and later TV was a unifying linguistic force across the country. Nuclear does not have a flat "oo" but not quite as pronounced as "nwey". Maybe "new"?
Bloop bloop is an Aussie, although as a high income lawyer I doubt g'day mate is part of his regular vocabulary. ;-)
Believe it or not, my greeting to all clients and opponents is "g'day mate" or "g'day (name)". It's a very widespread greeting and not one that is only associated with really broad Australian English!
Post by: Morning Glory on December 27, 2020, 06:49:15 AM
This is not a 'mistake' but it annoys me how Americans pronounce a flat "oo" sound in nuclear, new, renew, etc
I’m perplexed at this one...how would you pronounce them? Genuinely curious.
Canadians have regional accents but not big ones - we basically speak CBC English. CBC radio and later TV was a unifying linguistic force across the country. Nuclear does not have a flat "oo" but not quite as pronounced as "nwey". Maybe "new"?
Bloop bloop is an Aussie, although as a high income lawyer I doubt g'day mate is part of his regular vocabulary. ;-)
Believe it or not, my greeting to all clients and opponents is "g'day mate" or "g'day (name)". It's a very widespread greeting and not one that is only associated with really broad Australian English!
I've caught myself using some northern midwest regional expressions lately, such as "I s'pose" to indicate the need to leave. The other morning it was below zero out so I got out my "big coat".
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 27, 2020, 10:06:01 AM
As an American who closely observed Canadians, I’d say this is generally true from British Columbia through Ontario. The maritimes get particularly unique with their regional dialects, with parts of Newfoundland and Labrador so different that they took a fair bit of effort to understand.This is not a 'mistake' but it annoys me how Americans pronounce a flat "oo" sound in nuclear, new, renew, etc
I’m perplexed at this one...how would you pronounce them? Genuinely curious.
Canadians have regional accents but not big ones - we basically speak CBC English. CBC radio and later TV was a unifying linguistic force across the country. Nuclear does not have a flat "oo" but not quite as pronounced as "nwey". Maybe "new"?
Bloop bloop is an Aussie, although as a high income lawyer I doubt g'day mate is part of his regular vocabulary. ;-)
There is also the francophone debate about the French spoken by eight million Québécois. It’s certainly not the French spoken by Parisians, much as the English spoken in Ireland is different from how it is spoken in California. Which is more “correct” will never be established.
The overwhelming majority of Canadians live west of the maritimes.
Newfoundland only joined Confederation in 1949, they had gone their own way linguistically for a long time.
I find that where regions differ is a bit of accent but more vocabulary. I only know what a slough is because my Dad grew up in Alberta.
And Quebec French and joual, Quebec is the Newfoundland of the French language.
Post by: ysette9 on December 27, 2020, 10:14:27 AM
It is plural in French also “les maths”.Maths.
That's my new most hated word.
Oh, I feel like you are going to get some pushback on that one! I used to be skeptical, too, until a British friend pointed out that mathematics is plural so why not the shortened version?
Post by: ysette9 on December 27, 2020, 10:47:11 AM
Way back on grammar, I did only grammar for four years in grades 5-8 in a sub-par Christian school. Then I did only writing in a public high school, so I am one of the few of my age who seems to know some grammar.
Nothing made it stick and made sense though like learning a foreign language. That helped me understand English a lot better.
And I struggle to listen to and understand Canadian French. It is like you take your two fingers and pinch the end of your nose and then speak. But I have to remind myself that this is how American English sounds to the British...
Post by: slackmax on December 27, 2020, 02:51:41 PM
How pretentious.
I looked it up, and "cadence'" is a new business buzzword, apparently.
Post by: Freedomin5 on December 27, 2020, 02:58:56 PM
There is also the francophone debate about the French spoken by eight million Québécois. It’s certainly not the French spoken by Parisians, much as the English spoken in Ireland is different from how it is spoken in California.
There's a WWII movie called Monument Men where a group of art experts become soldiers to preserve Europe's art/monuments/history towards the end of the war. Matt Damon plays a soldier who amongst his group is the only one with even the slightest experience in French. It's a running joke that every time he opens his mouth the French person asks "where did you learn to speak French?" He says "Ottawa." The French person laughs and says "let's just stick with English."
I grew up in Ontario learning French from a Quebecois teacher. Top of my class. Was selected to represent the school at conferences held in French. Visited Paris the year after I graduated high school, walked into a McDonald’s to order a hamburger and fries, and was told in French-accented English by the cashier, “Speak English. I do not understand your French.”
Post by: ysette9 on December 27, 2020, 03:09:12 PM
Ouch
There is also the francophone debate about the French spoken by eight million Québécois. It’s certainly not the French spoken by Parisians, much as the English spoken in Ireland is different from how it is spoken in California.
There's a WWII movie called Monument Men where a group of art experts become soldiers to preserve Europe's art/monuments/history towards the end of the war. Matt Damon plays a soldier who amongst his group is the only one with even the slightest experience in French. It's a running joke that every time he opens his mouth the French person asks "where did you learn to speak French?" He says "Ottawa." The French person laughs and says "let's just stick with English."
I grew up in Ontario learning French from a Quebecois teacher. Top of my class. Was selected to represent the school at conferences held in French. Visited Paris the year after I graduated high school, walked into a McDonald’s to order a hamburger and fries, and was told in French-accented English by the cashier, “Speak English. I do not understand your French.”
Post by: MoseyingAlong on December 27, 2020, 03:11:35 PM
I was watching the apology from the general who was directing the recent vaccine rollout. He apologized for not having completely learned the "cadence" of something or other. Really? But you got the melody right, right?
How pretentious.
I looked it up, and "cadence'" is a new business buzzword, apparently. Barfo !
It may be new as a business buzzword but it is not new to the military.
Every soldier/airman/etc. learns to march in cadence.
Every operation has (had?) a cadence. (In the late 90s, the operational cadence was something we discussed. Don't have more recent experience.)
I doubt it was pretentious at all for an old general to use it. Maybe hold off on the snap judgment?
Post by: slackmax on December 27, 2020, 04:11:56 PM
I was watching the apology from the general who was directing the recent vaccine rollout. He apologized for not having completely learned the "cadence" of something or other. Really? But you got the melody right, right?
How pretentious.
I looked it up, and "cadence'" is a new business buzzword, apparently. Barfo !
It may be new as a business buzzword but it is not new to the military.
Every soldier/airman/etc. learns to march in cadence.
Every operation has (had?) a cadence. (In the late 90s, the operational cadence was something we discussed. Don't have more recent experience.)
I doubt it was pretentious at all for an old general to use it. Maybe hold off on the snap judgment?
You bring new acumen to the discussion. "Cadence" as he used it, sounds less pretentious now.
Post by: Kris on December 27, 2020, 04:27:28 PM
There is also the francophone debate about the French spoken by eight million Québécois. It’s certainly not the French spoken by Parisians, much as the English spoken in Ireland is different from how it is spoken in California.
There's a WWII movie called Monument Men where a group of art experts become soldiers to preserve Europe's art/monuments/history towards the end of the war. Matt Damon plays a soldier who amongst his group is the only one with even the slightest experience in French. It's a running joke that every time he opens his mouth the French person asks "where did you learn to speak French?" He says "Ottawa." The French person laughs and says "let's just stick with English."
I grew up in Ontario learning French from a Quebecois teacher. Top of my class. Was selected to represent the school at conferences held in French. Visited Paris the year after I graduated high school, walked into a McDonald’s to order a hamburger and fries, and was told in French-accented English by the cashier, “Speak English. I do not understand your French.”
As a non-French person who is bilingual (in a former life I was a tenured French professor, and I have been mistaken for French or Swiss by French natives) I want to chime in and say this is not just French snobbery. I adore listening to Quebecois French. Love the accent, love the expressions, etc. But it is the one “type” of French that I still sometimes have trouble understanding. French spoken by Belgians, Parisians, people from the Midi, Camerounais, Sénégalais, Rwandais, Marocains, Algériens... no problem at all. Québécois? Sometimes it almost breaks my brain if they are speaking quickly.
Post by: Chaplin on December 27, 2020, 07:15:58 PM
As a non-French person who is bilingual (in a former life I was a tenured French professor, and I have been mistaken for French or Swiss by French natives) I want to chime in and say this is not just French snobbery. I adore listening to Quebecois French. Love the accent, love the expressions, etc. But it is the one “type” of French that I still sometimes have trouble understanding. French spoken by Belgians, Parisians, people from the Midi, Camerounais, Sénégalais, Rwandais, Marocains, Algériens... no problem at all. Québécois? Sometimes it almost breaks my brain if they are speaking quickly.
I get mistaken for Swiss too when I speak French. I did French-immersion in Ontario, Grade 5 in France, a semester of Engineering school in France, and then worked in Quebec. Now, it's my grammar slips that give me away as an anglo, not my accent, even if they can't place it.
Post by: calimom on December 27, 2020, 07:38:35 PM
"Redue," a misspelling of "redo," is today's entry in the file of misspellings.
I think “redue” should be our new term for when you renew a library book (or similar)
“ your book is now redue on January 12th”
The pronunciation of "redux" used to perplex me until I heard a college English professor say it correctly as "re-ducks". I'd originally thought it was "re-do". It's not a word used much in regular conversation, which is likely a good thing as it would sound pretentious and be overused. But I'm glad it's there.
Post by: Paul der Krake on December 27, 2020, 07:59:52 PM
I grew up in Ontario learning French from a Quebecois teacher. Top of my class. Was selected to represent the school at conferences held in French. Visited Paris the year after I graduated high school, walked into a McDonald’s to order a hamburger and fries, and was told in French-accented English by the cashier, “Speak English. I do not understand your French.”I don't think any French person would ever tell a Quebec native to speak English, unless they wanted to be a dick. It's hard to understand, but come on.
That being said, a French company would never in a million years put one in any sort of job that requires public speaking. The audience would think it's a joke.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 27, 2020, 08:05:49 PM
"Redue," a misspelling of "redo," is today's entry in the file of misspellings.
I think “redue” should be our new term for when you renew a library book (or similar)
“ your book is now redue on January 12th”
The pronunciation of "redux" used to perplex me until I heard a college English professor say it correctly as "re-ducks". I'd originally thought it was "re-do". It's not a word used much in regular conversation, which is likely a good thing as it would sound pretentious and be overused. But I'm glad it's there.
I've actually never heard anyone say redux, but I always assumed it was re-ducks. Roux, on the other hand, is borrowed from French and is "roo".
Re Quebec French, TV French was fine and Provincial meetings were fine, but French I tried to listen to on the bus was completely unintelligible. Too fast and too much joual (slang).
Stupid auto carrot thinks joual should be jovial. ;-(
Post by: Freedomin5 on December 27, 2020, 11:16:54 PM
"Redue," a misspelling of "redo," is today's entry in the file of misspellings.
I think “redue” should be our new term for when you renew a library book (or similar)
“ your book is now redue on January 12th”
The pronunciation of "redux" used to perplex me until I heard a college English professor say it correctly as "re-ducks". I'd originally thought it was "re-do". It's not a word used much in regular conversation, which is likely a good thing as it would sound pretentious and be overused. But I'm glad it's there.
I've actually never heard anyone say redux, but I always assumed it was re-ducks. Roux, on the other hand, is borrowed from French and is "roo".
Re Quebec French, TV French was fine and Provincial meetings were fine, but French I tried to listen to on the bus was completely unintelligible. Too fast and too much joual (slang).
Stupid auto carrot thinks joual should be jovial. ;-(
And I like that your autocorrect thinks it should be called “auto carrot”. 😂
Post by: ministashy on December 28, 2020, 12:55:15 AM
Post by: Morning Glory on December 28, 2020, 02:13:56 AM
"Redue," a misspelling of "redo," is today's entry in the file of misspellings.
I think “redue” should be our new term for when you renew a library book (or similar)
“ your book is now redue on January 12th”
The pronunciation of "redux" used to perplex me until I heard a college English professor say it correctly as "re-ducks". I'd originally thought it was "re-do". It's not a word used much in regular conversation, which is likely a good thing as it would sound pretentious and be overused. But I'm glad it's there.
I just found out last year that the second p in apoptosis is supposed to be silent. I've had it wrong in my head for decades, but it's not a word that one pronounces out loud very often. I knew the p in ptosis was silent, so it makes sense.
Post by: yakamashii on December 28, 2020, 03:13:53 AM
This is not a 'mistake' but it annoys me how Americans pronounce a flat "oo" sound in nuclear, new, renew, etc
I’m perplexed at this one...how would you pronounce them? Genuinely curious.
Canadians have regional accents but not big ones - we basically speak CBC English. CBC radio and later TV was a unifying linguistic force across the country. Nuclear does not have a flat "oo" but not quite as pronounced as "nwey". Maybe "new"?
Bloop bloop is an Aussie, although as a high income lawyer I doubt g'day mate is part of his regular vocabulary. ;-)
I'm bugged in the opposite direction (don't like hearing "nyews," "renyewal," etc.), mostly because Japan decided to adopt British pronunciation for many loan words with that sound (ニュース、リニューアルなど). If I were King of the World, I'd change all the yoos to oos.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on December 28, 2020, 04:09:54 AM
"Redue," a misspelling of "redo," is today's entry in the file of misspellings.
I think “redue” should be our new term for when you renew a library book (or similar)
“ your book is now redue on January 12th”
The pronunciation of "redux" used to perplex me until I heard a college English professor say it correctly as "re-ducks". I'd originally thought it was "re-do". It's not a word used much in regular conversation, which is likely a good thing as it would sound pretentious and be overused. But I'm glad it's there.
I just found out last year that the second p in apoptosis is supposed to be silent. I've had it wrong in my head for decades, but it's not a word that one pronounces out loud very often. I knew the p in ptosis was silent, so it makes sense.
I didn't know this either. That said, the rules for the 'pt' formation from Greek are not uniformly applied.
Post by: Morning Glory on December 28, 2020, 04:26:17 AM
"Redue," a misspelling of "redo," is today's entry in the file of misspellings.
I think “redue” should be our new term for when you renew a library book (or similar)
“ your book is now redue on January 12th”
The pronunciation of "redux" used to perplex me until I heard a college English professor say it correctly as "re-ducks". I'd originally thought it was "re-do". It's not a word used much in regular conversation, which is likely a good thing as it would sound pretentious and be overused. But I'm glad it's there.
I just found out last year that the second p in apoptosis is supposed to be silent. I've had it wrong in my head for decades, but it's not a word that one pronounces out loud very often. I knew the p in ptosis was silent, so it makes sense.
I didn't know this either. That said, the rules for the 'pt' formation from Greek are not uniformly applied.
Oh yes, I took classical Greek in college and I think they pronounce the p. It's been a long time though.
The p in ileopsoas is silent, I knew that one.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 28, 2020, 05:51:37 AM
Post by: nereo on December 28, 2020, 07:34:38 AM
I've heard biologists (including me) pronounce both Ps in apoptosis. However the p in pterygota and apterygota, as well as psoas, is definitely silent.
Speaking of which... this was the gift my mother gave to my toddler-daughter for Christmas:
(https://prodimage.images-bn.com/pimages/9781492674313_p0_v2_s1200x630.jpg)
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 28, 2020, 08:04:49 AM
I've heard biologists (including me) pronounce both Ps in apoptosis. However the p in pterygota and apterygota, as well as psoas, is definitely silent.
Speaking of which... this was the gift my mother gave to my toddler-daughter for Christmas:
(https://prodimage.images-bn.com/pimages/9781492674313_p0_v2_s1200x630.jpg)
Oooh, I think we adults need that book too. Your mother gives her grand-daughter good presents.
ETA I just put it on hold at the library. I probably need it almost as much as your daughter! And the drawings look fun. ;-)
Post by: Morning Glory on December 28, 2020, 08:59:27 AM
I gave that to my nieceI've heard biologists (including me) pronounce both Ps in apoptosis. However the p in pterygota and apterygota, as well as psoas, is definitely silent.
Speaking of which... this was the gift my mother gave to my toddler-daughter for Christmas:
(https://prodimage.images-bn.com/pimages/9781492674313_p0_v2_s1200x630.jpg)
Oooh, I think we adults need that book too. Your mother gives her grand-daughter good presents.
ETA I just put it on hold at the library. I probably need it almost as much as your daughter! And the drawings look fun. ;-)
Post by: BlueHouse on December 29, 2020, 09:01:15 AM
"Redue," a misspelling of "redo," is today's entry in the file of misspellings.
I think “redue” should be our new term for when you renew a library book (or similar)
“ your book is now redue on January 12th”
Is it possible they meant "redux" instead of "redo"? Because I've heard people pronounce redux like that.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 29, 2020, 09:53:49 AM
"Redue," a misspelling of "redo," is today's entry in the file of misspellings.
I think “redue” should be our new term for when you renew a library book (or similar)
“ your book is now redue on January 12th”
Is it possible they meant "redux" instead of "redo"? Because I've heard people pronounce redux like that.
No.
In the context in which the poster incorrectly posted "redue" the only logical construction is that they misspelled "redo."
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 30, 2020, 01:04:50 PM
I've heard biologists (including me) pronounce both Ps in apoptosis. However the p in pterygota and apterygota, as well as psoas, is definitely silent.
Speaking of which... this was the gift my mother gave to my toddler-daughter for Christmas:
(https://prodimage.images-bn.com/pimages/9781492674313_p0_v2_s1200x630.jpg)
Added to my wishlist, and I also was recommended No Reading Allowed: The WORST Read-Aloud Book Ever, the preview of which made me collapse with laughter! Thank you!
Post by: Travis on December 30, 2020, 05:12:16 PM
Post by: nereo on December 30, 2020, 05:56:11 PM
Suddenly I'm reminded about my own French lessons. "Just don't pronounce half the letters. They're all silent."
Sounds similar to what one of my French teachers liked to say: “There’s a rule for it, but there are so many exceptions that there’s no point learning the rule” Um.... ok...?
Post by: Paul der Krake on December 30, 2020, 05:57:40 PM
Oui c'e la viSuddenly I'm reminded about my own French lessons. "Just don't pronounce half the letters. They're all silent."
Sounds similar to what one of my French teachers liked to say: “There’s a rule for it, but there are so many exceptions that there’s no point learning the rule” Um.... ok...?
Post by: Tigerpine on December 30, 2020, 06:13:44 PM
Post by: FIRE Artist on December 30, 2020, 08:50:00 PM
Whinging...with that extraneous "g" in the middle. Listen, I when I complain, I whine, dammit! I don't whinge! :)
It is an actual word with an actual meaning, which is generally considered to be different than whining. This is commonly used in the UK.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 30, 2020, 09:40:28 PM
Suddenly I'm reminded about my own French lessons. "Just don't pronounce half the letters. They're all silent."
And as Josh Freed wrote in The Anglo Guide to Quebec, if you need a French word, think of the fanciest word for something in Englsh and give it a French pronunciation. It works surprisingly well.
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 30, 2020, 11:49:02 PM
Whinging...with that extraneous "g" in the middle. Listen, I when I complain, I whine, dammit! I don't whinge! :)
It is an actual word with an actual meaning, which is generally considered to be different than whining. This is commonly used in the UK.
+1, and I think your complaining repertoire is impoverished by confining yourself to whining. Broaden your mind and winge a little!
Post by: Tigerpine on December 31, 2020, 04:40:23 AM
Whinging...with that extraneous "g" in the middle. Listen, I when I complain, I whine, dammit! I don't whinge! :)
It is an actual word with an actual meaning, which is generally considered to be different than whining. This is commonly used in the UK.
Really? Wow, that's new to me. I learned something today.
Whinging...with that extraneous "g" in the middle. Listen, I when I complain, I whine, dammit! I don't whinge! :)
It is an actual word with an actual meaning, which is generally considered to be different than whining. This is commonly used in the UK.
+1, and I think your complaining repertoire is impoverished by confining yourself to whining. Broaden your mind and winge a little!
Obviously so. I'll have to start practicing "whinging" to get the hang of it.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 31, 2020, 05:27:45 AM
Post by: Kris on December 31, 2020, 06:14:09 AM
Post by: nereo on December 31, 2020, 07:55:52 AM
Post by: Tigerpine on December 31, 2020, 08:00:23 AM
I used to think it was a misspelling. Now that I realize it is an actual word and not a simple spelling error, I am ok with it.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on December 31, 2020, 08:26:08 AM
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 31, 2020, 09:56:34 AM
Post by: Tigerpine on December 31, 2020, 10:22:13 AM
For children, I'm imagining the kid making his/her case by saying, "But mo-o-m, I never get to (insert whatever you like here)!"
Post by: MoseyingAlong on December 31, 2020, 10:44:34 AM
Hm. Tough one. To me, whining describes a certain tone of voice whereas whinging is more about the content of the words. But it's hard to put my finger on.
After the posts yesterday, I looked it up. According to the first Google result, whining is complaining to complain. Whinging is complaining with the intent that someone will do something to fix it. Does that sound close to any peeps who use both?
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 31, 2020, 11:06:22 AM
Hm. Tough one. To me, whining describes a certain tone of voice whereas whinging is more about the content of the words. But it's hard to put my finger on.
After the posts yesterday, I looked it up. According to the first Google result, whining is complaining to complain. Whinging is complaining with the intent that someone will do something to fix it. Does that sound close to any peeps who use both?
I don't really recognise that at all! If anything I'd say it's the other way around. You whine at people, whereas whinging is basically marinading in your own petulance.
Tigerpine, if anything I would actually say that dogs whine and people whinge. In your example, and these really are fine grades of distinction, I would say that "Muuuuum, I never get to do anything! You're so uncool!" is whinging. But "Muuuuuum, can I go to Legoland? Can I? Can I? Pleeeeeeeaaaaaase!" is whining.
Post by: BlueHouse on December 31, 2020, 11:09:19 AM
Post by: Tigerpine on December 31, 2020, 11:31:34 AM
Hm. Tough one. To me, whining describes a certain tone of voice whereas whinging is more about the content of the words. But it's hard to put my finger on.
After the posts yesterday, I looked it up. According to the first Google result, whining is complaining to complain. Whinging is complaining with the intent that someone will do something to fix it. Does that sound close to any peeps who use both?
I don't really recognise that at all! If anything I'd say it's the other way around. You whine at people, whereas whinging is basically marinading in your own petulance.
Tigerpine, if anything I would actually say that dogs whine and people whinge. In your example, and these really are fine grades of distinction, I would say that "Muuuuum, I never get to do anything! You're so uncool!" is whinging. But "Muuuuuum, can I go to Legoland? Can I? Can I? Pleeeeeeeaaaaaase!" is whining.
That's a great example! In the past, I would have always said that both of your "Muuuuum" examples are whining, but I can actually make out a distincting between the two. So, thank you for the enlightenment!
Post by: calimom on December 31, 2020, 12:07:43 PM
:P
Post by: shelivesthedream on December 31, 2020, 01:05:32 PM
Hm. Tough one. To me, whining describes a certain tone of voice whereas whinging is more about the content of the words. But it's hard to put my finger on.
After the posts yesterday, I looked it up. According to the first Google result, whining is complaining to complain. Whinging is complaining with the intent that someone will do something to fix it. Does that sound close to any peeps who use both?
I don't really recognise that at all! If anything I'd say it's the other way around. You whine at people, whereas whinging is basically marinading in your own petulance.
Tigerpine, if anything I would actually say that dogs whine and people whinge. In your example, and these really are fine grades of distinction, I would say that "Muuuuum, I never get to do anything! You're so uncool!" is whinging. But "Muuuuuum, can I go to Legoland? Can I? Can I? Pleeeeeeeaaaaaase!" is whining.
That's a great example! In the past, I would have always said that both of your "Muuuuum" examples are whining, but I can actually make out a distincting between the two. So, thank you for the enlightenment!
I'm so glad! :)
Post by: Chaplin on December 31, 2020, 02:16:34 PM
If a person is without complaint, are they unwhinged?
:P
Your use of language is quite ept.
Post by: SunnyDays on December 31, 2020, 03:52:53 PM
Suddenly I'm reminded about my own French lessons. "Just don't pronounce half the letters. They're all silent."
Sounds similar to what one of my French teachers liked to say: “There’s a rule for it, but there are so many exceptions that there’s no point learning the rule” Um.... ok...?
Yes, but you need to know the rules to know which half of the letters to not pronounce!
Post by: Freedomin5 on December 31, 2020, 04:20:29 PM
I don't really recognise that at all! If anything I'd say it's the other way around. You whine at people, whereas whinging is basically marinading in your own petulance.
This phrase is awesome! 😂 We have so many negative Nellies at work. Whenever I hear complaining/whinging, I’m going to start telling people, “Please stop marinating in your own petulance.”
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 31, 2020, 04:30:36 PM
!!!! HAPPY NEW YEAR !!!!
Post by: slackmax on January 07, 2021, 08:59:38 AM
Post by: nereo on January 07, 2021, 11:40:50 AM
Irregardless.
Regardless means "without regard". Irregardless would mean "without without regard" - which is to say it's a useless word. Almost universally when the word "irregardless" is used the speaker should have simply said "regardless." OED lists it as a "nonstandard" word.
Post by: sui generis on January 07, 2021, 03:14:08 PM
Post by: dandarc on January 07, 2021, 03:45:44 PM
Post by: sui generis on January 07, 2021, 03:54:56 PM
Is it the ruh vs. reh in that pronunciation that bothers you? Because if that isn't the part that sounds off to you, I'm curious as to what your preferred pronunciation is.
No, it's the emphasis on the second syllable (the TOR, like it is done with rhetorical), rather than the emphasis on the first syllable, like this: https://www.howmanysyllables.com/words/rhetoric
Post by: nereo on January 07, 2021, 04:27:02 PM
Post by: iris lily on January 07, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
“I have less anxiety than I had at one time.” Correct
“I have less apples in the refrigerator than I need for the week. “. Incorrect
Post by: sui generis on January 07, 2021, 04:47:49 PM
I’m tired of people using the word “less” when they need to use “fewer.” I can’t cite the grammatical reason why this is the correct thing, I just know that it sounds wrong to my ear.
“I have less anxiety than I had at one time.” Correct
“I have less apples in the refrigerator than I need for the week. “. Incorrect
It's cuz if it's countable you use fewer. You can count the number of apples, but not the number of anxiety.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on January 07, 2021, 04:51:07 PM
I’m tired of people using the word “less” when they need to use “fewer.” I can’t cite the grammatical reason why this is the correct thing, I just know that it sounds wrong to my ear.
“I have less anxiety than I had at one time.” Correct
“I have less apples in the refrigerator than I need for the week. “. Incorrect
This bothers me too.
Likewise the erosion of the distinction between disinterested / uninterested
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
I can understand the descriptivist approach to all of the above blah blah blah blah
It bothers me when we lose meaningful distinctions via the elision of separate concepts into one junky concept. When 'less' and 'fewer' mean the same thing, why have both words at all? And if we have both words being commonly used, why not try to observe the distinction?
It's just an endorsement of lazy thought processes imo. And that is my prescriptivist rant for the day.
Post by: Morning Glory on January 07, 2021, 05:15:48 PM
I’m tired of people using the word “less” when they need to use “fewer.” I can’t cite the grammatical reason why this is the correct thing, I just know that it sounds wrong to my ear.
“I have less anxiety than I had at one time.” Correct
“I have less apples in the refrigerator than I need for the week. “. Incorrect
It's cuz if it's countable you use fewer. You can count the number of apples, but not the number of anxiety.
Ugh this was wrong on my kid's math worksheet. I crossed out "less" and put "fewer".
Post by: merula on January 08, 2021, 10:17:21 AM
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
Singular they goes back to Shakespeare and before, and has a different meaning than "he or her", in that it's emphasizing that it's not speaking about a specific person.
‘Tis meet that some more audience than a mother, Since nature makes them partial, should o’erhear the speech. (Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 3, spoken by Polonius)
In this case "them" is referring to "a mother", but it's used instead of "her" to mean that Polonius is talking about a generic mother rather than Queen Gertrude specifically.
Sometimes "he or her" can be used in place of a singular "they", but they're not directly equivalent.
Post by: nereo on January 08, 2021, 11:24:12 AM
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
What would you use when speaking about someone who's gender is either unknown or non-binary?
'They' is the only thing I can think of...
Post by: Metalcat on January 08, 2021, 11:32:41 AM
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
What would you use when speaking about someone who's gender is either unknown or non-binary?
'They' is the only thing I can think of...
I go out of my way to use gender neutral they/them/their for this very reason.
I made the mistake *once* of using gendered language with a very, very important client assuming her spouse was male. So in professional contexts I now use as little gendering as possible. This also makes it super easy for me when talking to or about non-binary folks, where my colleagues tend to trip over their pronouns.
Post by: nereo on January 08, 2021, 11:38:38 AM
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
What would you use when speaking about someone who's gender is either unknown or non-binary?
'They' is the only thing I can think of...
I go out of my way to use gender neutral they/them/their for this very reason.
I made the mistake *once* of using gendered language with a very, very important client assuming her spouse was male. So in professional contexts I now use as little gendering as possible. This also makes it super easy for me when talking to or about non-binary folks, where my colleagues tend to trip over their pronouns.
Oof - I did something similar when preparing to interview a potential student. I had an applicant named "Jessie" who was married with a husband. I stupidly used female pronouns until the head of the department cut me off mid-sentence to say: "Please realize Jessie is MALE". Clearly, I did not do my due diligence.
Post by: Metalcat on January 08, 2021, 11:41:09 AM
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
What would you use when speaking about someone who's gender is either unknown or non-binary?
'They' is the only thing I can think of...
I go out of my way to use gender neutral they/them/their for this very reason.
I made the mistake *once* of using gendered language with a very, very important client assuming her spouse was male. So in professional contexts I now use as little gendering as possible. This also makes it super easy for me when talking to or about non-binary folks, where my colleagues tend to trip over their pronouns.
Oof - I did something similar when preparing to interview a potential student. I had an applicant named "Jessie" who was married with a husband. I stupidly used female pronouns until the head of the department cut me off mid-sentence to say: "Please realize Jessie is MALE". Clearly, I did not do my due diligence.
It's such an easy mistake to make, but can be quite a nasty one in certain situations.
Post by: Dicey on January 08, 2021, 01:16:45 PM
I’m tired of people using the word “less” when they need to use “fewer.” I can’t cite the grammatical reason why this is the correct thing, I just know that it sounds wrong to my ear.I hope you got an "A".
“I have less anxiety than I had at one time.” Correct
“I have less apples in the refrigerator than I need for the week. “. Incorrect
It's cuz if it's countable you use fewer. You can count the number of apples, but not the number of anxiety.
Ugh this was wrong on my kid's math worksheet. I crossed out "less" and put "fewer".
Post by: iris lily on January 08, 2021, 01:21:26 PM
I’m tired of people using the word “less” when they need to use “fewer.” I can’t cite the grammatical reason why this is the correct thing, I just know that it sounds wrong to my ear.
“I have less anxiety than I had at one time.” Correct
“I have less apples in the refrigerator than I need for the week. “. Incorrect
This bothers me too.
Likewise the erosion of the distinction between disinterested / uninterested
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
I can understand the descriptivist approach to all of the above blah blah blah blah
It bothers me when we lose meaningful distinctions via the elision of separate concepts into one junky concept. When 'less' and 'fewer' mean the same thing, why have both words at all? And if we have both words being commonly used, why not try to observe the distinction?
It's just an endorsement of lazy thought processes imo. And that is my prescriptivist rant for the day.
“Likewise the singular use of they...”
Oh buddy, I knew you were in trouble when I read this You’re not gonna win this one. Use of “they/them” is changing. Like it or not, it’s changing. Unclear or not, it’s changing. Strident voices will correct you. Just get used to it.
Post by: SunnyDays on January 08, 2021, 01:50:36 PM
I’m tired of people using the word “less” when they need to use “fewer.” I can’t cite the grammatical reason why this is the correct thing, I just know that it sounds wrong to my ear.
“I have less anxiety than I had at one time.” Correct
“I have less apples in the refrigerator than I need for the week. “. Incorrect
This bothers me too.
Likewise the erosion of the distinction between disinterested / uninterested
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
I can understand the descriptivist approach to all of the above blah blah blah blah
It bothers me when we lose meaningful distinctions via the elision of separate concepts into one junky concept. When 'less' and 'fewer' mean the same thing, why have both words at all? And if we have both words being commonly used, why not try to observe the distinction?
It's just an endorsement of lazy thought processes imo. And that is my prescriptivist rant for the day.
“Likewise the singular use of they...”
Oh buddy, I knew you were in trouble when I read this You’re not gonna win this one. Use of “they/them” is changing. Like it or not, it’s changing. Unclear or not, it’s changing. Strident voices will correct you. Just get used to it.
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
Post by: sui generis on January 08, 2021, 02:30:45 PM
I’m tired of people using the word “less” when they need to use “fewer.” I can’t cite the grammatical reason why this is the correct thing, I just know that it sounds wrong to my ear.
“I have less anxiety than I had at one time.” Correct
“I have less apples in the refrigerator than I need for the week. “. Incorrect
This bothers me too.
Likewise the erosion of the distinction between disinterested / uninterested
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
I can understand the descriptivist approach to all of the above blah blah blah blah
It bothers me when we lose meaningful distinctions via the elision of separate concepts into one junky concept. When 'less' and 'fewer' mean the same thing, why have both words at all? And if we have both words being commonly used, why not try to observe the distinction?
It's just an endorsement of lazy thought processes imo. And that is my prescriptivist rant for the day.
“Likewise the singular use of they...”
Oh buddy, I knew you were in trouble when I read this You’re not gonna win this one. Use of “they/them” is changing. Like it or not, it’s changing. Unclear or not, it’s changing. Strident voices will correct you. Just get used to it.
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
Regarding the modern use of pronouns, refusing any pronoun and using someone's proper name is another option that is out there to avoid misgendering someone or making assumptions. I'm not sure it will be preferable for someone like you that "refuses to be bullied." A client at one of my volunteer orgs expressed their preference for this recently, and I thought was much more awkward than just using "they" all the time. Example: Jane thought Jane would be comfortable driving that distance but that Jane's car was not in the best condition so Jane was unsure Jane could drive Jane's car to the destination and might need to borrow someone else's car. Jane appreciated our help with this and expressed Jane's thanks and asked us to share Jane's thanks with the rest of the team.
Post by: SunnyDays on January 08, 2021, 02:52:37 PM
I have no issue with using something entirely different. I rather liked “zee.” Then one could also use “zey” and “zem.” ( Except auto correct won’t accept those words, so that could be a pain!)
Post by: BlueHouse on January 08, 2021, 03:00:20 PM
Maybe bullied is too strong a word. Let’s say pressured? Expected?
I have no issue with using something entirely different. I rather liked “zee.” Then one could also use “zey” and “zem.” ( Except auto correct won’t accept those words, so that could be a pain!)
I hope you would feel differently if people tell you exactly how they wish to be addressed. Were you bullied into using African-American? or do you still use "colored"?
Post by: SunnyDays on January 08, 2021, 03:21:33 PM
Maybe bullied is too strong a word. Let’s say pressured? Expected?
I have no issue with using something entirely different. I rather liked “zee.” Then one could also use “zey” and “zem.” ( Except auto correct won’t accept those words, so that could be a pain!)
I hope you would feel differently if people tell you exactly how they wish to be addressed. Were you bullied into using African-American? or do you still use "colored"?
If I’m addressing a person directly, I would use “you,” of course.
And no, I don’t use “coloured.” But then again, I don’t use “African American “ either, because I really don’t refer to people based on their race.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on January 08, 2021, 04:16:24 PM
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
What would you use when speaking about someone who's gender is either unknown or non-binary?
'They' is the only thing I can think of...
I use "his or her"
I don't know what the singular non-binary pronoun is but we should settle on one and then I can use "his, her or X"
They sounds jarring to me. I know there are plenty of precedents in literature etc
There are also places where singular 'they' makes sense, e.g. - "everybody has their own opinion" sounds more fluent than "everybody has his or her own opinion"
but mostly singular they jars
"Each person chooses for themselves"
(ugh) - or worse, "each person chooses for themself"
also i get annoyed by gender neutral pronouns when there is no need for gender neutrality
eg discussing members of a women's soccer team "The player will need to get their socks" no it's "her" it's an all female team
Post by: Kris on January 08, 2021, 05:12:24 PM
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
What would you use when speaking about someone who's gender is either unknown or non-binary?
'They' is the only thing I can think of...
I use "his or her"
I don't know what the singular non-binary pronoun is but we should settle on one and then I can use "his, her or X"
They sounds jarring to me. I know there are plenty of precedents in literature etc
There are also places where singular 'they' makes sense, e.g. - "everybody has their own opinion" sounds more fluent than "everybody has his or her own opinion"
but mostly singular they jars
"Each person chooses for themselves"
(ugh) - or worse, "each person chooses for themself"
also i get annoyed by gender neutral pronouns when there is no need for gender neutrality
eg discussing members of a women's soccer team "The player will need to get their socks" no it's "her" it's an all female team
What about for a person who is not either who specifically asks you to use “them” as their pronouns?
Post by: nereo on January 08, 2021, 05:31:48 PM
As an analogy, imagine you were introduced to a new colleague, who’s official name is Dr. RObert Smith. He might say “Call me Bob” or “Call me Robert” or even “I prefer to keep my business professional, so please refer to me as Dr. Smith”. In every case I would call them by the name they prefer. Likewise, I use a derivation of my birth name, and get annoyed when people repeatedly use my full name when I feel they should know better.
If RObert/Bob/Dr. Smith instead told me “I prefer ‘they/them” — why should that be any than calling them Bob/Robert/Dr. Smith?
Post by: iris lily on January 08, 2021, 06:49:31 PM
Maybe bullied is too strong a word. Let’s say pressured? Expected?
I have no issue with using something entirely different. I rather liked “zee.” Then one could also use “zey” and “zem.” ( Except auto correct won’t accept those words, so that could be a pain!)
I like the new words too. Wish they had caught on.
Cant we make them catch on?
Post by: iris lily on January 08, 2021, 06:55:20 PM
My take on this is that it’s simply a matter of respect to address or refer to someone with the pronoun they prefer. It doesn’t cost me anything, and using he preferred pronoun shows I care enough about the person to be cognizant of their wishes.
As an analogy, imagine you were introduced to a new colleague, who’s official name is Dr. RObert Smith. He might say “Call me Bob” or “Call me Robert” or even “I prefer to keep my business professional, so please refer to me as Dr. Smith”. In every case I would call them by the name they prefer. Likewise, I use a derivation of my birth name, and get annoyed when people repeatedly use my full name when I feel they should know better.
If RObert/Bob/Dr. Smith instead told me “I prefer ‘they/them” — why should that be any than calling them Bob/Robert/Dr. Smith?
Because when you have a whole row of Dr. Whomever standing there, and 3 wish to be called them/they and one of them is “he” and the rest say they dont care...
Yeah you expect me to remember this shit?
I feel so sorry for college professors. Can I they use surnames? Do they need TA’s to help them keep track of the pronouns now?
Post by: Metalcat on January 08, 2021, 07:23:04 PM
My take on this is that it’s simply a matter of respect to address or refer to someone with the pronoun they prefer. It doesn’t cost me anything, and using he preferred pronoun shows I care enough about the person to be cognizant of their wishes.
As an analogy, imagine you were introduced to a new colleague, who’s official name is Dr. RObert Smith. He might say “Call me Bob” or “Call me Robert” or even “I prefer to keep my business professional, so please refer to me as Dr. Smith”. In every case I would call them by the name they prefer. Likewise, I use a derivation of my birth name, and get annoyed when people repeatedly use my full name when I feel they should know better.
If RObert/Bob/Dr. Smith instead told me “I prefer ‘they/them” — why should that be any than calling them Bob/Robert/Dr. Smith?
Because when you have a whole row of Dr. Whomever standing there, and 3 wish to be called them/they and one of them is “he” and the rest say they dont care...
Yeah you expect me to remember this shit?
I feel so sorry for college professors. Can I they use surnames? Do they need TA’s to help them keep track of the pronouns now?
IDK, I treated thousands of patients and I didn't generally find it difficult to remember which ones requested non binary pronouns.
Post by: nereo on January 08, 2021, 07:37:46 PM
My take on this is that it’s simply a matter of respect to address or refer to someone with the pronoun they prefer. It doesn’t cost me anything, and using he preferred pronoun shows I care enough about the person to be cognizant of their wishes.
As an analogy, imagine you were introduced to a new colleague, who’s official name is Dr. RObert Smith. He might say “Call me Bob” or “Call me Robert” or even “I prefer to keep my business professional, so please refer to me as Dr. Smith”. In every case I would call them by the name they prefer. Likewise, I use a derivation of my birth name, and get annoyed when people repeatedly use my full name when I feel they should know better.
If RObert/Bob/Dr. Smith instead told me “I prefer ‘they/them” — why should that be any than calling them Bob/Robert/Dr. Smith?
Because when you have a whole row of Dr. Whomever standing there, and 3 wish to be called them/they and one of them is “he” and the rest say they dont care...
Yeah you expect me to remember this shit?
I feel so sorry for college professors. Can I they use surnames? Do they need TA’s to help them keep track of the pronouns now?
Well I do teach college, and I don't find it any more difficult. Typically, the semester starts with "what do you wish to be called". Most students and virtually all staff include in their email signature their preferred pronouns. And of course, if you are ever not sure - just ask.
How is that substantially any different from decades ago? People change their last name, people change their first name, people gain titles, but don't always use them. How is this any different?
Post by: Kris on January 08, 2021, 07:50:45 PM
My take on this is that it’s simply a matter of respect to address or refer to someone with the pronoun they prefer. It doesn’t cost me anything, and using he preferred pronoun shows I care enough about the person to be cognizant of their wishes.
As an analogy, imagine you were introduced to a new colleague, who’s official name is Dr. RObert Smith. He might say “Call me Bob” or “Call me Robert” or even “I prefer to keep my business professional, so please refer to me as Dr. Smith”. In every case I would call them by the name they prefer. Likewise, I use a derivation of my birth name, and get annoyed when people repeatedly use my full name when I feel they should know better.
If RObert/Bob/Dr. Smith instead told me “I prefer ‘they/them” — why should that be any than calling them Bob/Robert/Dr. Smith?
Because when you have a whole row of Dr. Whomever standing there, and 3 wish to be called them/they and one of them is “he” and the rest say they dont care...
Yeah you expect me to remember this shit?
I feel so sorry for college professors. Can I they use surnames? Do they need TA’s to help them keep track of the pronouns now?
Well I do teach college, and I don't find it any more difficult. Typically, the semester starts with "what do you wish to be called". Most students and virtually all staff include in their email signature their preferred pronouns. And of course, if you are ever not sure - just ask.
How is that substantially any different from decades ago? People change their last name, people change their first name, people gain titles, but don't always use them. How is this any different?
Exactly. Day one is when you mark down nicknames, pronunciations, etc. on the class roster. Teachers have been doing it for years.
Post by: sui generis on January 08, 2021, 08:45:12 PM
My take on this is that it’s simply a matter of respect to address or refer to someone with the pronoun they prefer. It doesn’t cost me anything, and using he preferred pronoun shows I care enough about the person to be cognizant of their wishes.
As an analogy, imagine you were introduced to a new colleague, who’s official name is Dr. RObert Smith. He might say “Call me Bob” or “Call me Robert” or even “I prefer to keep my business professional, so please refer to me as Dr. Smith”. In every case I would call them by the name they prefer. Likewise, I use a derivation of my birth name, and get annoyed when people repeatedly use my full name when I feel they should know better.
If RObert/Bob/Dr. Smith instead told me “I prefer ‘they/them” — why should that be any than calling them Bob/Robert/Dr. Smith?
Because when you have a whole row of Dr. Whomever standing there, and 3 wish to be called them/they and one of them is “he” and the rest say they dont care...
Yeah you expect me to remember this shit?
I feel so sorry for college professors. Can I they use surnames? Do they need TA’s to help them keep track of the pronouns now?
Well I do teach college, and I don't find it any more difficult. Typically, the semester starts with "what do you wish to be called". Most students and virtually all staff include in their email signature their preferred pronouns. And of course, if you are ever not sure - just ask.
How is that substantially any different from decades ago? People change their last name, people change their first name, people gain titles, but don't always use them. How is this any different?
Exactly. Day one is when you mark down nicknames, pronunciations, etc. on the class roster. Teachers have been doing it for years.
Exactly. I can't imagine someone pronouncing my name wrong (which everyone does) and then getting through a list of other people with undoubtedly a few other challenging pronunciations and just being like, "gah! How am I supposed to remember all that! I'm just going to pronounce all your names however I like!"
I saw a meme recently teasing about how when a woman gets married and decides to change her name, people not only go out of their way to remember but to take extra pains to use her new name when a name isn't even needed as a way of giving her extra plaudits (marriage=highest achievement unlocked for a human female!) so it should be no problem to remember someone's pronouns. It just shows who and what you care about, not what is actually difficult for the human memory.
In practice it can be a process, sure. My sister completely changed her first name about 20 years ago and it was hard (and some of us close family were not a little bit resentful) to keep correcting ourselves. But, you'll work on it if you care. If you don't, I guess you'll just dismiss it as if it is different than the ease with which you correct your usage of a new last name for a woman excited to have gotten married and that (say it with me) says more about you than it does about them.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on January 09, 2021, 07:09:02 AM
Likewise the use of singular 'they' in place of 'his or her' or 'his' or 'her'
What would you use when speaking about someone who's gender is either unknown or non-binary?
'They' is the only thing I can think of...
I use "his or her"
I don't know what the singular non-binary pronoun is but we should settle on one and then I can use "his, her or X"
They sounds jarring to me. I know there are plenty of precedents in literature etc
There are also places where singular 'they' makes sense, e.g. - "everybody has their own opinion" sounds more fluent than "everybody has his or her own opinion"
but mostly singular they jars
"Each person chooses for themselves"
(ugh) - or worse, "each person chooses for themself"
also i get annoyed by gender neutral pronouns when there is no need for gender neutrality
eg discussing members of a women's soccer team "The player will need to get their socks" no it's "her" it's an all female team
What about for a person who is not either who specifically asks you to use “them” as their pronouns?
Then I would follow that wish in that instance.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on January 09, 2021, 09:46:20 AM
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
As a free-speech absolutist I resist dogmatic imposition of woke vernacular but I am always willing to speak to or of individuals using their preferred identifier.
Post by: iris lily on January 09, 2021, 09:54:48 AM
My take on this is that it’s simply a matter of respect to address or refer to someone with the pronoun they prefer. It doesn’t cost me anything, and using he preferred pronoun shows I care enough about the person to be cognizant of their wishes.
As an analogy, imagine you were introduced to a new colleague, who’s official name is Dr. RObert Smith. He might say “Call me Bob” or “Call me Robert” or even “I prefer to keep my business professional, so please refer to me as Dr. Smith”. In every case I would call them by the name they prefer. Likewise, I use a derivation of my birth name, and get annoyed when people repeatedly use my full name when I feel they should know better.
If RObert/Bob/Dr. Smith instead told me “I prefer ‘they/them” — why should that be any than calling them Bob/Robert/Dr. Smith?
Because when you have a whole row of Dr. Whomever standing there, and 3 wish to be called them/they and one of them is “he” and the rest say they dont care...
Yeah you expect me to remember this shit?
I feel so sorry for college professors. Can I they use surnames? Do they need TA’s to help them keep track of the pronouns now?
Well I do teach college, and I don't find it any more difficult. Typically, the semester starts with "what do you wish to be called". Most students and virtually all staff include in their email signature their preferred pronouns. And of course, if you are ever not sure - just ask.
How is that substantially any different from decades ago? People change their last name, people change their first name, people gain titles, but don't always use them. How is this any different?
How’s it different from back in the day? Surnames were important, the rest of it not. Some professors were still using Miss Ms and Mr.. Some of them used surname with no honorific, like the military. I liked the simplicity of that.
I say this as a student of course not as a professor. I’m sure there were plenty of professors who used our first names, likely most did, I just don’t remember them, Probably because that was the common thing.
Post by: nereo on January 09, 2021, 10:50:19 AM
My take on this is that it’s simply a matter of respect to address or refer to someone with the pronoun they prefer. It doesn’t cost me anything, and using he preferred pronoun shows I care enough about the person to be cognizant of their wishes.
As an analogy, imagine you were introduced to a new colleague, who’s official name is Dr. RObert Smith. He might say “Call me Bob” or “Call me Robert” or even “I prefer to keep my business professional, so please refer to me as Dr. Smith”. In every case I would call them by the name they prefer. Likewise, I use a derivation of my birth name, and get annoyed when people repeatedly use my full name when I feel they should know better.
If RObert/Bob/Dr. Smith instead told me “I prefer ‘they/them” — why should that be any than calling them Bob/Robert/Dr. Smith?
Because when you have a whole row of Dr. Whomever standing there, and 3 wish to be called them/they and one of them is “he” and the rest say they dont care...
Yeah you expect me to remember this shit?
I feel so sorry for college professors. Can I they use surnames? Do they need TA’s to help them keep track of the pronouns now?
Well I do teach college, and I don't find it any more difficult. Typically, the semester starts with "what do you wish to be called". Most students and virtually all staff include in their email signature their preferred pronouns. And of course, if you are ever not sure - just ask.
How is that substantially any different from decades ago? People change their last name, people change their first name, people gain titles, but don't always use them. How is this any different?
How’s it different from back in the day? Surnames were important, the rest of it not. Some professors were still using Miss Ms and Mr.. Some of them used surname with no honorific, like the military. I liked the simplicity of that.
I say this as a student of course not as a professor. I’m sure there were plenty of professors who used our first names, likely most did, I just don’t remember them, Probably because that was the common thing.
I’m still not understanding where your objection is coming from. If “back in the day” a student preferred NOT to be referred to as “Miss” (which even my mother found offensive as a university student circa 1970) - wouldn’t a reasonable person avoid using that pro-noun?
In my experience there are two dominant reasons why people object to using gender-neutral pronouns when called to:
- It is grammatically incongruent, and often goes against what was taught in English class for decades
- They object to the person not conforming to their biological gender, or any gender. [the “snowflake” insult]
The first one I understand in part, as I too was drilled by multiple English classes on the (then) proper use of “him/her and his/hers”. However, no better alternative is accepted, and has been pointed out they/them has long been a part of the English language.
As for the second, I’m left wondering why someone would object to such a simple request. To me it’s just common decency to address a person in a way that makes them comfortable, and I expect them to do the same for me.
Post by: iris lily on January 09, 2021, 12:10:16 PM
The ones who used Ms used Ms. Some who liked the honorific would make effort to find out if you were Miss or Mrs.
In some classes I was Iris, inother classes (granted, only one or two ) I was Ms Lilies or Lilies. Much of this depends on size of the class and familiarity with teacher.
Post by: nereo on January 09, 2021, 04:30:06 PM
The profs I am thinking of didnt ask how we expected to be addressed. . Perhaps that is the core difference.
The ones who used Ms used Ms. Some who liked the honorific would make effort to find out if you were Miss or Mrs.
In some classes I was Iris, inother classes (granted, only one or two ) I was Ms Lilies or Lilies. Much of this depends on size of the class and familiarity with teacher.
Ok, but I’m having trouble connecting this back to the conversation at hand. Why not call someone by their preferred name or pronoun?
Post by: Kris on January 09, 2021, 04:36:56 PM
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
As a free-speech absolutist I resist dogmatic imposition of woke vernacular but I am always willing to speak to or of individuals using their preferred identifier.
I fail to see how this is in any way a freedom of speech issue?
Post by: LaineyAZ on January 09, 2021, 06:47:53 PM
I'm having trouble following threads on this or other forums, or regular emails, or text messages, which use many unfamiliar or more obscure acronyms. There's an assumption that everyone knows all of the acronyms for the finance world, or medical arena, or government nomenclature, or many other parts of our everyday life when in fact these are not common and require insider knowledge.
Usually I can eventually figure out the gist of what's being said, but I wish that writers would spell out the acronym when it's first used (which used to be a requirement in writing etiquette if I'm not mistaken). So please spell out that word or phrase - it would make reading so much more enjoyable if we don't have to stop to decipher it.
Thanks!
Post by: Paul der Krake on January 09, 2021, 06:54:02 PM
Can I flip this around for a minute?Have you ever worked for a large organization, say 20,000 employees or more? Acronyms are the law of the land over there. The first two months are spent learning why the CAPS system stopped serving DPO requests, but then BFAR came in to replace BTG and everything is better now.
I'm having trouble following threads on this or other forums, or regular emails, or text messages, which use many unfamiliar or more obscure acronyms. There's an assumption that everyone knows all of the acronyms for the finance world, or medical arena, or government nomenclature, or many other parts of our everyday life when in fact these are not common and require insider knowledge.
Usually I can eventually figure out the gist of what's being said, but I wish that writers would spell out the acronym when it's first used (which used to be a requirement in writing etiquette if I'm not mistaken). So please spell out that word or phrase - it would make reading so much more enjoyable if we don't have to stop to decipher it.
Thanks!
Post by: iris lily on January 09, 2021, 08:54:20 PM
The profs I am thinking of didnt ask how we expected to be addressed. . Perhaps that is the core difference.
The ones who used Ms used Ms. Some who liked the honorific would make effort to find out if you were Miss or Mrs.
In some classes I was Iris, inother classes (granted, only one or two ) I was Ms Lilies or Lilies. Much of this depends on size of the class and familiarity with teacher.
Ok, but I’m having trouble connecting this back to the conversation at hand. Why not call someone by their preferred name or pronoun?
You win. If I can remember it I’ll do it. Please don’t take it personally if I forget which pronoun or name you want to be used for you.
Post by: nereo on January 10, 2021, 08:10:43 AM
The profs I am thinking of didnt ask how we expected to be addressed. . Perhaps that is the core difference.
The ones who used Ms used Ms. Some who liked the honorific would make effort to find out if you were Miss or Mrs.
In some classes I was Iris, inother classes (granted, only one or two ) I was Ms Lilies or Lilies. Much of this depends on size of the class and familiarity with teacher.
Ok, but I’m having trouble connecting this back to the conversation at hand. Why not call someone by their preferred name or pronoun?
You win. If I can remember it I’ll do it. Please don’t take it personally if I forget which pronoun or name you want to be used for you.
I have no interest in “winning” as this isn’t an argument. I’m trying to understand why one might object to calling someone by their preferred name or pronoun.
Post by: LaineyAZ on January 10, 2021, 08:23:53 AM
Can I flip this around for a minute?Have you ever worked for a large organization, say 20,000 employees or more? Acronyms are the law of the land over there. The first two months are spent learning why the CAPS system stopped serving DPO requests, but then BFAR came in to replace BTG and everything is better now.
I'm having trouble following threads on this or other forums, or regular emails, or text messages, which use many unfamiliar or more obscure acronyms. There's an assumption that everyone knows all of the acronyms for the finance world, or medical arena, or government nomenclature, or many other parts of our everyday life when in fact these are not common and require insider knowledge.
Usually I can eventually figure out the gist of what's being said, but I wish that writers would spell out the acronym when it's first used (which used to be a requirement in writing etiquette if I'm not mistaken). So please spell out that word or phrase - it would make reading so much more enjoyable if we don't have to stop to decipher it.
Thanks!
Ha, yes! I retired from a MegaCorp and thankfully have forgotten most of those acronyms, but the first month I was there I was pleading my co-workers to "speak English!" Of course I was assimilated, as they say, and it didn't take long though before I became one of them.
And related to that, I think it's a reason that automated discovery for legal matters won't ever be totally workable - a computer program that is scanning a document or email looking for a certain word would skip over any phrase or in-house slang that it didn't realize is referring to the same thing.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on January 10, 2021, 01:55:50 PM
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
As a free-speech absolutist I resist dogmatic imposition of woke vernacular but I am always willing to speak to or of individuals using their preferred identifier.
I fail to see how this is in any way a freedom of speech issue?
It isn't a free speech issue in terms of governmental censorship proscribed by the First Amendment because speech that is spoken in civil society's zone of autonomy is beyond the reach of government.
Within this zone of autonomy every speaker has the right to be the the arbiter of their speech. When they speak their speech doesn't have to conform to anyone else's standards and vice versa.
One's personal right to speak as they please is the quintessence of free speech spoken in civil society. Speaking according to the dictates of wokeness by using only gender-neutral pronouns is optional.
Post by: Paul der Krake on January 10, 2021, 02:27:07 PM
My free speech absolutism ends at people putting extra spaces between words for no reason.
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
As a free-speech absolutist I resist dogmatic imposition of woke vernacular but I am always willing to speak to or of individuals using their preferred identifier.
I fail to see how this is in any way a freedom of speech issue?
It isn't a free speech issue in terms of governmental censorship proscribed by the First Amendment because speech that is spoken in civil society's zone of autonomy is beyond the reach of government.
Within this zone of autonomy every speaker has the right to be the the arbiter of their speech. When they speak their speech doesn't have to conform to anyone else's standards and vice versa.
One's personal right to speak as they please is the quintessence of free speech spoken in civil society. Speaking according to the dictates of wokeness by using only gender-neutral pronouns is optional.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 10, 2021, 02:56:34 PM
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
As a free-speech absolutist I resist dogmatic imposition of woke vernacular but I am always willing to speak to or of individuals using their preferred identifier.
I fail to see how this is in any way a freedom of speech issue?
It isn't a free speech issue in terms of governmental censorship proscribed by the First Amendment because speech that is spoken in civil society's zone of autonomy is beyond the reach of government.
Within this zone of autonomy every speaker has the right to be the the arbiter of their speech. When they speak their speech doesn't have to conform to anyone else's standards and vice versa.
One's personal right to speak as they please is the quintessence of free speech spoken in civil society. Speaking according to the dictates of wokeness by using only gender-neutral pronouns is optional.
In general society, if someone is unhappy with someone else's way of speaking to them, they can object, they can walk away from the conversation, they can cut that person out of their life. But in a situation where this is not possible*, it is politeness and a lubricant to civil society for the person with more power to address the person with less power the way they wish to be addressed.
For example: personally I love "Ms." for mail. "Ms." may seem standard to you, but it was part of the "woke" vocabulary of my young adulthood. I am formerly married so "Miss" doesn't fit, and am divorced so "Mrs". doesn't fit either. If I ask a generic you to address me as "Ms." in correspondence and generic you uses either "Miss" or "Mrs." I will make a judgement on your character, and it will not be favourable.
*teacher:student, employer:employee, police/government official:/anyone
Post by: Kris on January 10, 2021, 04:08:42 PM
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
As a free-speech absolutist I resist dogmatic imposition of woke vernacular but I am always willing to speak to or of individuals using their preferred identifier.
I fail to see how this is in any way a freedom of speech issue?
It isn't a free speech issue in terms of governmental censorship proscribed by the First Amendment because speech that is spoken in civil society's zone of autonomy is beyond the reach of government.
Within this zone of autonomy every speaker has the right to be the the arbiter of their speech. When they speak their speech doesn't have to conform to anyone else's standards and vice versa.
One's personal right to speak as they please is the quintessence of free speech spoken in civil society. Speaking according to the dictates of wokeness by using only gender-neutral pronouns is optional.
In general society, if someone is unhappy with someone else's way of speaking to them, they can object, they can walk away from the conversation, they can cut that person out of their life. But in a situation where this is not possible*, it is politeness and a lubricant to civil society for the person with more power to address the person with less power the way they wish to be addressed.
For example: personally I love "Ms." for mail. "Ms." may seem standard to you, but it was part of the "woke" vocabulary of my young adulthood. I am formerly married so "Miss" doesn't fit, and am divorced so "Mrs". doesn't fit either. If I ask a generic you to address me as "Ms." in correspondence and generic you uses either "Miss" or "Mrs." I will make a judgement on your character, and it will not be favourable.
*teacher:student, employer:employee, police/government official:/anyone
And more than a few dudes were assholes about it back in the day and pointedly refused to call a woman “Ms.” For many of the same/similar arguments that people use today about pronouns.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 10, 2021, 04:14:31 PM
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
As a free-speech absolutist I resist dogmatic imposition of woke vernacular but I am always willing to speak to or of individuals using their preferred identifier.
I fail to see how this is in any way a freedom of speech issue?
It isn't a free speech issue in terms of governmental censorship proscribed by the First Amendment because speech that is spoken in civil society's zone of autonomy is beyond the reach of government.
Within this zone of autonomy every speaker has the right to be the the arbiter of their speech. When they speak their speech doesn't have to conform to anyone else's standards and vice versa.
One's personal right to speak as they please is the quintessence of free speech spoken in civil society. Speaking according to the dictates of wokeness by using only gender-neutral pronouns is optional.
In general society, if someone is unhappy with someone else's way of speaking to them, they can object, they can walk away from the conversation, they can cut that person out of their life. But in a situation where this is not possible*, it is politeness and a lubricant to civil society for the person with more power to address the person with less power the way they wish to be addressed.
For example: personally I love "Ms." for mail. "Ms." may seem standard to you, but it was part of the "woke" vocabulary of my young adulthood. I am formerly married so "Miss" doesn't fit, and am divorced so "Mrs". doesn't fit either. If I ask a generic you to address me as "Ms." in correspondence and generic you uses either "Miss" or "Mrs." I will make a judgement on your character, and it will not be favourable.
*teacher:student, employer:employee, police/government official:/anyone
And more than a few dudes were assholes about it back in the day and pointedly refused to call a woman “Ms.” For many of the same/similar arguments that people use today about pronouns.
Exactly. Which I hoped would make it a good example.
Post by: Metalcat on January 10, 2021, 06:28:46 PM
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
As a free-speech absolutist I resist dogmatic imposition of woke vernacular but I am always willing to speak to or of individuals using their preferred identifier.
I fail to see how this is in any way a freedom of speech issue?
It isn't a free speech issue in terms of governmental censorship proscribed by the First Amendment because speech that is spoken in civil society's zone of autonomy is beyond the reach of government.
Within this zone of autonomy every speaker has the right to be the the arbiter of their speech. When they speak their speech doesn't have to conform to anyone else's standards and vice versa.
One's personal right to speak as they please is the quintessence of free speech spoken in civil society. Speaking according to the dictates of wokeness by using only gender-neutral pronouns is optional.
In general society, if someone is unhappy with someone else's way of speaking to them, they can object, they can walk away from the conversation, they can cut that person out of their life. But in a situation where this is not possible*, it is politeness and a lubricant to civil society for the person with more power to address the person with less power the way they wish to be addressed.
For example: personally I love "Ms." for mail. "Ms." may seem standard to you, but it was part of the "woke" vocabulary of my young adulthood. I am formerly married so "Miss" doesn't fit, and am divorced so "Mrs". doesn't fit either. If I ask a generic you to address me as "Ms." in correspondence and generic you uses either "Miss" or "Mrs." I will make a judgement on your character, and it will not be favourable.
*teacher:student, employer:employee, police/government official:/anyone
And more than a few dudes were assholes about it back in the day and pointedly refused to call a woman “Ms.” For many of the same/similar arguments that people use today about pronouns.
Yup, plus all the rants about feminism going too far. Same.shit, different pile.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on January 10, 2021, 08:00:58 PM
I maintain that in a general case (when referring to a generic singular person) "he or she" is the way to go.
If it means a lot to people that we be gender inclusive perhaps we can think of more singular pronouns and then "he, she or X" will be the way to go.
Mandating "they" as an all-inclusive generic singular pronoun (to the detriment of any other pronoun) rather seems to overstep the mark, particularly for those of us who identify as a "he" or a "she" and not a "they".
Post by: sui generis on January 10, 2021, 08:09:58 PM
This only captures the specific case where a specific person wants a specific pronoun.
I maintain that in a general case (when referring to a generic singular person) "he or she" is the way to go.
If it means a lot to people that we be gender inclusive perhaps we can think of more singular pronouns and then "he, she or X" will be the way to go.
Mandating "they" as an all-inclusive generic singular pronoun (to the detriment of any other pronoun) rather seems to overstep the mark, particularly for those of us who identify as a "he" or a "she" and not a "they".
Well, nobody is mandating anything, of course. It's just different customs arising. But I will agree insofar as "they" is an actual pronoun some people choose so calling someone "they" because you don't know could be misgendering that person the same as calling someone a "he" because you don't know. The challenge comes in that it may both be a preferred specific pronoun and is also customarily being used as a generic pronoun for "unknown", which seems...sloppy? I don't know. It's sort of the best we've got atm and I guess I should get kicked out of this thread for expressing this kind of flexibility, but I have generally been happy to just sort of go with the flow and see where things evolve and end up over the course of the next decade or so.
Post by: Kris on January 10, 2021, 08:14:21 PM
This only captures the specific case where a specific person wants a specific pronoun.
I maintain that in a general case (when referring to a generic singular person) "he or she" is the way to go.
If it means a lot to people that we be gender inclusive perhaps we can think of more singular pronouns and then "he, she or X" will be the way to go.
Mandating "they" as an all-inclusive generic singular pronoun (to the detriment of any other pronoun) rather seems to overstep the mark, particularly for those of us who identify as a "he" or a "she" and not a "they".
Imagine caring more about grammar than people.
Post by: Metalcat on January 11, 2021, 12:32:39 AM
This only captures the specific case where a specific person wants a specific pronoun.
I maintain that in a general case (when referring to a generic singular person) "he or she" is the way to go.
If it means a lot to people that we be gender inclusive perhaps we can think of more singular pronouns and then "he, she or X" will be the way to go.
Mandating "they" as an all-inclusive generic singular pronoun (to the detriment of any other pronoun) rather seems to overstep the mark, particularly for those of us who identify as a "he" or a "she" and not a "they".
Literally no one is mandating anything of the sort.
I personally *choose* to degender a lot of my language because I'm a medical professional also trained in psychology and clinical counselling and I happen to be tremendously aware first hand of how painful misgendering can be for people, especially misgendered adolescents.
Misgendered adolescents are at enormous risk for suicide. I've also seen multiple cases of misgendered kids go from dark and completely unreachable, to open, flourishing, bright kids before my eyes once they've been appropriately gendered, including non-binary. And their pronouns *really* matter to them, it's the way the world finally acknowledges that they are worthy of existing as their true selves.
If I can easily modify my language to be non traumatizing to suicidal children, that's a very, very small inconvenience for me and has a surprisingly huge impact on them. It's not a minor thing, I've had kids hug me and cry on my shoulder because I'm the first non family adult who can just naturally address them as they've dreamed of being addressed, with no awkwardness or mistakes.
So yeah, I don't treat it as a personal preference, I treat it as a public health priority. That's just my personal/professional reasons.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on January 11, 2021, 06:52:37 AM
This only captures the specific case where a specific person wants a specific pronoun.
I maintain that in a general case (when referring to a generic singular person) "he or she" is the way to go.
If it means a lot to people that we be gender inclusive perhaps we can think of more singular pronouns and then "he, she or X" will be the way to go.
Mandating "they" as an all-inclusive generic singular pronoun (to the detriment of any other pronoun) rather seems to overstep the mark, particularly for those of us who identify as a "he" or a "she" and not a "they".
Imagine caring more about grammar than people.
I think this is a bad faith response. Sui generis put out a much better and fairer and more insightful response. I suppose if people really like the word "they" as a nominally singular nongendered pronoun we can just incorporate it into the "he, she, X, or they" formulation and I guess that would make everyone happy. Then we just have to remember each person's preference between "he", "she", "X (the non-gendered singular pronoun, whatever consensus is reached on that)" and "they" (the non-gendered plural but nominally singular in this context pronoun). And in that sense everyone can be happy.
Post by: iris lily on January 11, 2021, 08:48:12 AM
I, too, I loved “MS “because every female person was a “MS. “. It is so damn easy. It appealed to me for the simplicity.
It only changes if people go along with it. I’ve not yet been presented with this issue personally, but if/when I am, I will simply avoid using a pronoun in favour of the appropriate noun ( person’s name or the person’s relationship to whomever is speaking, as in “Anne” or “your wife/husband”.) Both because it’s not grammatical and I refuse to be bullied.
As a free-speech absolutist I resist dogmatic imposition of woke vernacular but I am always willing to speak to or of individuals using their preferred identifier.
I fail to see how this is in any way a freedom of speech issue?
It isn't a free speech issue in terms of governmental censorship proscribed by the First Amendment because speech that is spoken in civil society's zone of autonomy is beyond the reach of government.
Within this zone of autonomy every speaker has the right to be the the arbiter of their speech. When they speak their speech doesn't have to conform to anyone else's standards and vice versa.
One's personal right to speak as they please is the quintessence of free speech spoken in civil society. Speaking according to the dictates of wokeness by using only gender-neutral pronouns is optional.
In general society, if someone is unhappy with someone else's way of speaking to them, they can object, they can walk away from the conversation, they can cut that person out of their life. But in a situation where this is not possible*, it is politeness and a lubricant to civil society for the person with more power to address the person with less power the way they wish to be addressed.
For example: personally I love "Ms." for mail. "Ms." may seem standard to you, but it was part of the "woke" vocabulary of my young adulthood. I am formerly married so "Miss" doesn't fit, and am divorced so "Mrs". doesn't fit either. If I ask a generic you to address me as "Ms." in correspondence and generic you uses either "Miss" or "Mrs." I will make a judgement on your character, and it will not be favourable.
*teacher:student, employer:employee, police/government official:/anyone
I would also go for referring to everyone as “ ze” and be done with it.
Post by: sui generis on January 11, 2021, 09:24:55 AM
This only captures the specific case where a specific person wants a specific pronoun.
I maintain that in a general case (when referring to a generic singular person) "he or she" is the way to go.
If it means a lot to people that we be gender inclusive perhaps we can think of more singular pronouns and then "he, she or X" will be the way to go.
Mandating "they" as an all-inclusive generic singular pronoun (to the detriment of any other pronoun) rather seems to overstep the mark, particularly for those of us who identify as a "he" or a "she" and not a "they".
Imagine caring more about grammar than people.
I think this is a bad faith response. Sui generis put out a much better and fairer and more insightful response. I suppose if people really like the word "they" as a nominally singular nongendered pronoun we can just incorporate it into the "he, she, X, or they" formulation and I guess that would make everyone happy. Then we just have to remember each person's preference between "he", "she", "X (the non-gendered singular pronoun, whatever consensus is reached on that)" and just "they" (the non-gendered plural but nominally singular in this context pronoun). And in that sense everyone can be happy.
You may have liked my response more because I didn't outright disagree with you, but I have to agree with @Kris that in the end, it's about prioritizing people over grammar, as @Malcat's example shows. I may have wondered about some of the mechanics and underlying principles, but wouldn't put that over people's comfort in practice. In fact, I have to say, advocating using "he or she or [something] or they" in practice rather than "they" rings super hollow. It sounds to me like a way to pretend to be providing a solution while making that solution so uncomfortable for everyone in order to try to get them to throw up their hands and just beg for the return of the patriarchy.
Hard pass on that.
Post by: Watchmaker on January 11, 2021, 09:33:51 AM
Mandating "they" as an all-inclusive generic singular pronoun (to the detriment of any other pronoun) rather seems to overstep the mark, particularly for those of us who identify as a "he" or a "she" and not a "they".
It doesn't really change anything for me, because I acknowledge language is always evolving and so being a historically used term doesn't make something right, but 'they' has been used as a singular, gender-neutral pronoun in English since at least 1375 AD.
Chaucer used it. Shakespeare did too. And Dickens, and Austin. You've certainly used it (as have I)--it's a part of normal speech.
Those that have objected to it (like the Chicago Manual of Style) have always been the minority. In my mind, that's why it has succeeded where newly invented terms like ze did not--because it was already familiar and in wide use.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on January 11, 2021, 04:54:38 PM
In general society, if someone is unhappy with someone else's way of speaking to them, they can object, they can walk away from the conversation, they can cut that person out of their life.
Of course, this is as it should be so we are in agreement.
Civil society is that sphere of life which may be thought of as including "homelife ," "domestic life," "time off from work," and "on vacation from school."
This civil-society sphere of life is separate from the world of business, everyday employment, governmental entities, and other institutions in which one's interactions do commend the nicety of politeness' lubricity as you posted below.
Furthermore, even within the exclusive zone of civil society I agree that accommodative politeness is *almost always preferable to boorish behavior and unseemly utterances.
*In some situations such as confronting a brute politeness is unavailing so an impolite rejoinder may be appropriate.
But in a situation where this is not possible*, it is politeness and a lubricant to civil society for the person with more power to address the person with less power the way they wish to be addressed.
*teacher:student, employer:employee, police/government official:/anyone
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 14, 2021, 11:25:27 AM
"bare with me"
NO, I do not plan to take any clothes off, it is cold outside. Maybe the author meant "bear with me"? As in "bear a burden" bear?
Post by: nereo on January 14, 2021, 03:14:31 PM
Just saw this on an otherwise good web site:
"bare with me"
NO, I do not plan to take any clothes off, it is cold outside. Maybe the author meant "bear with me"? As in "bear a burden" bear?
I suppose it depends on who the person is...?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 14, 2021, 05:59:42 PM
Just saw this on an otherwise good web site:
"bare with me"
NO, I do not plan to take any clothes off, it is cold outside. Maybe the author meant "bear with me"? As in "bear a burden" bear?
I suppose it depends on who the person is...?
Garden writer. And context was clearly "bear with me". But gardeners do bare a lot during high summer. ;-) just not now.
Post by: nereo on January 15, 2021, 06:57:20 AM
Just saw this on an otherwise good web site:
"bare with me"
NO, I do not plan to take any clothes off, it is cold outside. Maybe the author meant "bear with me"? As in "bear a burden" bear?
I suppose it depends on who the person is...?
Garden writer. And context was clearly "bear with me". But gardeners do bare a lot during high summer. ;-) just not now.
I meant, whether the listener wishes to take their clothes off ("bare with me") might depend on who the speaker is.
Sorry, dumb joke.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 15, 2021, 09:29:49 AM
Just saw this on an otherwise good web site:
"bare with me"
NO, I do not plan to take any clothes off, it is cold outside. Maybe the author meant "bear with me"? As in "bear a burden" bear?
I suppose it depends on who the person is...?
Garden writer. And context was clearly "bear with me". But gardeners do bare a lot during high summer. ;-) just not now.
I meant, whether the listener wishes to take their clothes off ("bare with me") might depend on who the speaker is.
Sorry, dumb joke.
Mmm, I got it. Gardeners do bare a lot in high summer. How much to bare would depend on who is the other gardener.
Post by: GreenSheep on January 20, 2021, 08:58:19 AM
"very sort of" as in "It was a very sort of gray day."
Well, which is it? Usually or always? Very or sort of? It can't be both!
Post by: Morning Glory on January 20, 2021, 11:32:10 AM
"usually always" as in "I usually always have pasta in the pantry so I can make a quick meal."That is annoying.
"very sort of" as in "It was a very sort of gray day."
Well, which is it? Usually or always? Very or sort of? It can't be both!
Post by: Morning Glory on January 20, 2021, 11:34:52 AM
Post by: Metalcat on January 20, 2021, 11:39:53 AM
Not really a word or phrase, but I find it condescending when articles and ebooks give the amount of time they should take to read. Usually it is way overestimated, and I wonder if that is on purpose to make people feel better.
Most people read very, very slowly compared to avid readers.
Post by: ixtap on January 20, 2021, 12:15:48 PM
Not really a word or phrase, but I find it condescending when articles and ebooks give the amount of time they should take to read. Usually it is way overestimated, and I wonder if that is on purpose to make people feel better.
Most people read very, very slowly compared to avid readers.
I read three times as fast as my husband, with better comprehension. He makes spreadsheets 5 times as fast as me, with better functionality.
Post by: iluvzbeach on January 20, 2021, 12:41:14 PM
"usually always" as in "I usually always have pasta in the pantry so I can make a quick meal."That is annoying.
"very sort of" as in "It was a very sort of gray day."
Well, which is it? Usually or always? Very or sort of? It can't be both!
I feel this way about the phrase “maybe could”. Can it be accomplished or is it just a possibility? It’s a phrase I’ve heard some friends from the southern part of the U.S. use.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on January 20, 2021, 12:50:09 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 20, 2021, 01:01:27 PM
Trump.
Gone. T**** replaced it. And now gone.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on January 20, 2021, 03:48:27 PM
Trump.
Gone. T**** replaced it. And now gone.
Can a t**** card even be called a t**** card anymore? That would imply that it is a winner, and that’s just a big gigantic non sequiter.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 20, 2021, 04:56:02 PM
Trump.
Gone. T**** replaced it. And now gone.
Can a t**** card even be called a t**** card anymore? That would imply that it is a winner, and that’s just a big gigantic non sequiter.
I know. He has spoiled this but card games came before he did. We will survive. Remember Eisenhower jackets? ;-)
Post by: nereo on January 20, 2021, 05:03:03 PM
Not really a word or phrase, but I find it condescending when articles and ebooks give the amount of time they should take to read. Usually it is way overestimated, and I wonder if that is on purpose to make people feel better.
Most people read very, very slowly compared to avid readers.
I just learned that fully half of the adults in my state can read at a sixth grade reading level or less. Half. Many will not read a single book all year, and 40% report that they “never” or “rarely” read anything longer than a single page (usually online posts or news articles).
THis information was presented to state government employees in an effort to explain the obstacles with corresponding to the broader public.
I read three times as fast as my husband, with better comprehension. He makes spreadsheets 5 times as fast as me, with better functionality.
Post by: GreenSheep on January 20, 2021, 05:10:55 PM
"usually always" as in "I usually always have pasta in the pantry so I can make a quick meal."That is annoying.
"very sort of" as in "It was a very sort of gray day."
Well, which is it? Usually or always? Very or sort of? It can't be both!
I feel this way about the phrase “maybe could”. Can it be accomplished or is it just a possibility? It’s a phrase I’ve heard some friends from the southern part of the U.S. use.
Oh, that's interesting. I've heard "might could" and just chalked it up to a difference in... dialect or regional speech patterns, I guess you would call it? With "maybe could," it is a matter of changing the position of the subject and the verb? So instead of saying, "Maybe he could do it," a person would say, "He maybe could do it." The first one sounds correct to me, while the second one sounds wrong... but if I consider that it might just be a difference in the way the language developed in a different region, then maybe it's not wrong...? I really don't know!
On a somewhat related note, a friend in the Deep South was just telling me today that you can't necessarily differentiate "lower class" and "upper class" based on how "good" a person's English is. (We're talking about native English speakers in the South, here.) A person might use "ain't" and double negatives and have a very twangy Southern drawl, but they might still be considered very high society. The same friend also pointed me toward some YouTube videos that argue that American Southern English is actually a slowed-down version of British English, which makes sense because that's where it originally came from. Language is so interesting.
Post by: GreenSheep on January 20, 2021, 05:17:04 PM
I just learned that fully half of the adults in my state can read at a sixth grade reading level or less. Half. Many will not read a single book all year, and 40% report that they “never” or “rarely” read anything longer than a single page (usually online posts or news articles).
Oh, I believe it. I remember many years ago when I did some online dating, I was shocked at how many profiles chose the answer that was something like, "I don't really read much" for that question. And these were people who were trying to impress each other! I guess I should be glad that at least they weren't lying.
I've also run into a lot of non-readers among people who otherwise seem intelligent and curious, like in a foreign language class I've been taking. People say they don't have time to read books... yet they have time for social media.
Even among my own friends and family, there are a handful don't hide the fact that they never, ever sit down and read a book. One almost seems proud of it; she blames it on her short attention span, as if that makes her cute and unique.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on January 20, 2021, 07:08:51 PM
1. Not smoke or drink appreciable amounts during pregnancy
2. Read to them like their lives depend on it, as much as you can, until they're old enough to read by themselves. Then take them to the library and encourage them to read as much as they can.
It's not rocket surgery.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on January 20, 2021, 07:12:03 PM
;-)
Post by: nereo on January 20, 2021, 07:13:29 PM
It's funny because with all the fuss about treating your baby to the nicest pram, best daycare, nicest most bestest elite schooling, best diet, and all that tangential stuff, people seem to forget that the two best things you can do for your children are:
1. Not smoke or drink appreciable amounts during pregnancy
2. Read to them like their lives depend on it, as much as you can, until they're old enough to read by themselves. Then take them to the library and encourage them to read as much as they can.
It's not rocket surgery.
I’d add
3) lots of active play, preferably outside, with you, with other kids and with themselves.
...but yeah, point taken. Reading to kids early and often is so important, and so overshadowed by what parents often worry about (and often has a relatively minor role in their development).
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on January 20, 2021, 07:24:07 PM
Okay, I have another one: rocket surgery...
;-)
I confess to deliberately mixing metaphors as much as I can - my latest favourite is "not the brightest tool in the picnic basket"
Post by: zolotiyeruki on January 20, 2021, 08:24:21 PM
English is such a weird language. Until a couple years ago, I had no idea that there are actual"usually always" as in "I usually always have pasta in the pantry so I can make a quick meal."That is annoying.
"very sort of" as in "It was a very sort of gray day."
Well, which is it? Usually or always? Very or sort of? It can't be both!
I feel this way about the phrase “maybe could”. Can it be accomplished or is it just a possibility? It’s a phrase I’ve heard some friends from the southern part of the U.S. use.
Oh, that's interesting. I've heard "might could" and just chalked it up to a difference in... dialect or regional speech patterns, I guess you would call it? With "maybe could," it is a matter of changing the position of the subject and the verb? So instead of saying, "Maybe he could do it," a person would say, "He maybe could do it." The first one sounds correct to me, while the second one sounds wrong... but if I consider that it might just be a difference in the way the language developed in a different region, then maybe it's not wrong...? I really don't know!
Post by: iluvzbeach on January 20, 2021, 08:54:59 PM
English is such a weird language. Until a couple years ago, I had no idea that there are actual"usually always" as in "I usually always have pasta in the pantry so I can make a quick meal."That is annoying.
"very sort of" as in "It was a very sort of gray day."
Well, which is it? Usually or always? Very or sort of? It can't be both!
I feel this way about the phrase “maybe could”. Can it be accomplished or is it just a possibility? It’s a phrase I’ve heard some friends from the southern part of the U.S. use.
Oh, that's interesting. I've heard "might could" and just chalked it up to a difference in... dialect or regional speech patterns, I guess you would call it? With "maybe could," it is a matter of changing the position of the subject and the verb? So instead of saying, "Maybe he could do it," a person would say, "He maybe could do it." The first one sounds correct to me, while the second one sounds wrong... but if I consider that it might just be a difference in the way the language developed in a different region, then maybe it's not wrong...? I really don't know!rulesguidelines that dictate the correct order of adjectives (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTm1tJYr5_M) preceding a noun.
I apologize, I meant to write “might could” and screwed up. It’s just such an odd way of wording things that I can’t even keep the words straight in my brain. It’s “might could” as in “We might could go to a movie this afternoon.”
Post by: Travis on January 20, 2021, 09:07:50 PM
English is such a weird language. Until a couple years ago, I had no idea that there are actual"usually always" as in "I usually always have pasta in the pantry so I can make a quick meal."That is annoying.
"very sort of" as in "It was a very sort of gray day."
Well, which is it? Usually or always? Very or sort of? It can't be both!
I feel this way about the phrase “maybe could”. Can it be accomplished or is it just a possibility? It’s a phrase I’ve heard some friends from the southern part of the U.S. use.
Oh, that's interesting. I've heard "might could" and just chalked it up to a difference in... dialect or regional speech patterns, I guess you would call it? With "maybe could," it is a matter of changing the position of the subject and the verb? So instead of saying, "Maybe he could do it," a person would say, "He maybe could do it." The first one sounds correct to me, while the second one sounds wrong... but if I consider that it might just be a difference in the way the language developed in a different region, then maybe it's not wrong...? I really don't know!rulesguidelines that dictate the correct order of adjectives (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTm1tJYr5_M) preceding a noun.
I apologize, I meant to write “might could” and screwed up. It’s just such an odd way of wording things that I can’t even keep the words straight in my brain. It’s “might could” as in “We might could go to a movie this afternoon.”
"I used to could do that. Get a couple beers in me and I might could again." Jeff Foxworthy.
Post by: Chaplin on January 20, 2021, 10:27:56 PM
Post by: iluvzbeach on January 20, 2021, 10:41:35 PM
Post by: Chaplin on January 20, 2021, 11:01:53 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on January 21, 2021, 06:48:10 AM
English is such a weird language. Until a couple years ago, I had no idea that there are actual"usually always" as in "I usually always have pasta in the pantry so I can make a quick meal."That is annoying.
"very sort of" as in "It was a very sort of gray day."
Well, which is it? Usually or always? Very or sort of? It can't be both!
I feel this way about the phrase “maybe could”. Can it be accomplished or is it just a possibility? It’s a phrase I’ve heard some friends from the southern part of the U.S. use.
Oh, that's interesting. I've heard "might could" and just chalked it up to a difference in... dialect or regional speech patterns, I guess you would call it? With "maybe could," it is a matter of changing the position of the subject and the verb? So instead of saying, "Maybe he could do it," a person would say, "He maybe could do it." The first one sounds correct to me, while the second one sounds wrong... but if I consider that it might just be a difference in the way the language developed in a different region, then maybe it's not wrong...? I really don't know!rulesguidelines that dictate the correct order of adjectives (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTm1tJYr5_M) preceding a noun.
I apologize, I meant to write “might could” and screwed up. It’s just such an odd way of wording things that I can’t even keep the words straight in my brain. It’s “might could” as in “We might could go to a movie this afternoon.”
Oh, I see! I never say "might could" myself, but I kind of like it in certain situations where it serves as a shortcut. Since I no longer live in the South, though, I would worry about getting a raised eyebrow in response if I used it myself. And even if I were in the South, since I don't have a Southern accent, true Southerners might think I'm a fake!
Post by: Morning Glory on January 21, 2021, 07:12:30 AM
I've heard "might could" and "useta could" in the Midwest also. The subjunctive is confusing in any language.English is such a weird language. Until a couple years ago, I had no idea that there are actual"usually always" as in "I usually always have pasta in the pantry so I can make a quick meal."That is annoying.
"very sort of" as in "It was a very sort of gray day."
Well, which is it? Usually or always? Very or sort of? It can't be both!
I feel this way about the phrase “maybe could”. Can it be accomplished or is it just a possibility? It’s a phrase I’ve heard some friends from the southern part of the U.S. use.
Oh, that's interesting. I've heard "might could" and just chalked it up to a difference in... dialect or regional speech patterns, I guess you would call it? With "maybe could," it is a matter of changing the position of the subject and the verb? So instead of saying, "Maybe he could do it," a person would say, "He maybe could do it." The first one sounds correct to me, while the second one sounds wrong... but if I consider that it might just be a difference in the way the language developed in a different region, then maybe it's not wrong...? I really don't know!rulesguidelines that dictate the correct order of adjectives (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTm1tJYr5_M) preceding a noun.
I apologize, I meant to write “might could” and screwed up. It’s just such an odd way of wording things that I can’t even keep the words straight in my brain. It’s “might could” as in “We might could go to a movie this afternoon.”
Oh, I see! I never say "might could" myself, but I kind of like it in certain situations where it serves as a shortcut. Since I no longer live in the South, though, I would worry about getting a raised eyebrow in response if I used it myself. And even if I were in the South, since I don't have a Southern accent, true Southerners might think I'm a fake!
How about "sposta" ? "I'm sposta be in court but I've had this toothache for two weeks that needs emergency attention right now"
Post by: merula on January 21, 2021, 10:15:29 AM
Post by: Dicey on January 21, 2021, 10:30:56 AM
How about "sposta" ? "I'm sposta be in court but I've had this toothache fortwoa coupla weeks that needs emergency attention right now"
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on January 21, 2021, 04:33:33 PM
On the other hand, I love using the phrase "come with" which is probably the same type of thing.
Post by: nereo on January 21, 2021, 04:49:51 PM
The American use of "anymore" to mean "nowadays" is confusing and strange to me
On the other hand, I love using the phrase "come with" which is probably the same type of thing.
I find much of Australian-English to be strange and confusing. The accent is easy enough to understand, but the unique words frequently leave me baffled.
Post by: merula on January 22, 2021, 11:31:07 AM
The American use of "anymore" to mean "nowadays" is confusing and strange to me
On the other hand, I love using the phrase "come with" which is probably the same type of thing.
I live in Minnesota which is probably the world capital of "come with" and "go with", and my German teachers pointed out that that structure would be grammatically correct in German, Swedish and Norwegian, which were the major immigrant groups to Minnesota. (This is also the source of the long vowels of the typical Minnesota accent, dooonchaah knoow?)
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 22, 2021, 02:39:01 PM
The American use of "anymore" to mean "nowadays" is confusing and strange to me
On the other hand, I love using the phrase "come with" which is probably the same type of thing.
I live in Minnesota which is probably the world capital of "come with" and "go with", and my German teachers pointed out that that structure would be grammatically correct in German, Swedish and Norwegian, which were the major immigrant groups to Minnesota. (This is also the source of the long vowels of the typical Minnesota accent, dooonchaah knoow?)
Could you give examples of sentences with "go with" and "come with"? I'm not seeing a problem with them, so I'm guessing it is how they are used in a sentence that bothers people.
Post by: Metalcat on January 22, 2021, 03:04:38 PM
The American use of "anymore" to mean "nowadays" is confusing and strange to me
On the other hand, I love using the phrase "come with" which is probably the same type of thing.
I live in Minnesota which is probably the world capital of "come with" and "go with", and my German teachers pointed out that that structure would be grammatically correct in German, Swedish and Norwegian, which were the major immigrant groups to Minnesota. (This is also the source of the long vowels of the typical Minnesota accent, dooonchaah knoow?)
Could you give examples of sentences with "go with" and "come with"? I'm not seeing a problem with them, so I'm guessing it is how they are used in a sentence that bothers people.
"I'm going to the store, want to come with?"
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 22, 2021, 07:06:18 PM
The American use of "anymore" to mean "nowadays" is confusing and strange to me
On the other hand, I love using the phrase "come with" which is probably the same type of thing.
I live in Minnesota which is probably the world capital of "come with" and "go with", and my German teachers pointed out that that structure would be grammatically correct in German, Swedish and Norwegian, which were the major immigrant groups to Minnesota. (This is also the source of the long vowels of the typical Minnesota accent, dooonchaah knoow?)
Could you give examples of sentences with "go with" and "come with"? I'm not seeing a problem with them, so I'm guessing it is how they are used in a sentence that bothers people.
"I'm going to the store, want to come with?"
Aah, they are being lazy and leaving out the last "me". Or being energetic, I would be fine with "I'm going to the store, want to come?" The "with me" being implied.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on January 22, 2021, 08:15:41 PM
How about "sposta" ? "I'm sposta be in court but I've had this toothache for two weeks that needs emergency attention right now"
I've heard people say "sposed to" instead of "supposed to."
And I've heard them say "I hafta ..."
Post by: Metalcat on January 22, 2021, 08:40:02 PM
The American use of "anymore" to mean "nowadays" is confusing and strange to me
On the other hand, I love using the phrase "come with" which is probably the same type of thing.
I live in Minnesota which is probably the world capital of "come with" and "go with", and my German teachers pointed out that that structure would be grammatically correct in German, Swedish and Norwegian, which were the major immigrant groups to Minnesota. (This is also the source of the long vowels of the typical Minnesota accent, dooonchaah knoow?)
Could you give examples of sentences with "go with" and "come with"? I'm not seeing a problem with them, so I'm guessing it is how they are used in a sentence that bothers people.
"I'm going to the store, want to come with?"
Aah, they are being lazy and leaving out the last "me". Or being energetic, I would be fine with "I'm going to the store, want to come?" The "with me" being implied.
Not lazy or energetic, just a dialectical variant common to certain regions, the same way that "let's go back to mine" isn't just a lazy version of "let's go back to my place", or "go to hospital" isn't a lazy version of "go to the hospital". They're just variants that aren't common in North America.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on January 22, 2021, 08:58:47 PM
I confess to deliberately mixing metaphors as much as I can - my latest favourite is "not the brightest tool in the picnic basket"
"Not the sharpest knife in the drawer" has a similar meaning.
Post by: Metalcat on January 23, 2021, 05:07:41 AM
I confess to deliberately mixing metaphors as much as I can - my latest favourite is "not the brightest tool in the picnic basket"
"Not the sharpest knife in the drawer" has a similar meaning.
Is that a mixed metaphor? I don't get it.
Post by: nereo on January 23, 2021, 05:51:26 AM
Color me confused as well...
I confess to deliberately mixing metaphors as much as I can - my latest favourite is "not the brightest tool in the picnic basket"
"Not the sharpest knife in the drawer" has a similar meaning.
Is that a mixed metaphor? I don't get it.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 23, 2021, 07:42:57 AM
How about "sposta" ? "I'm sposta be in court but I've had this toothache for two weeks that needs emergency attention right now"
I've heard people say "sposed to" instead of "supposed to."
And I've heard them say "I hafta ..."
I can live with people saying those. It's when they spell them like that. . . Aargg.
Post by: Kris on January 23, 2021, 08:44:36 AM
How about "sposta" ? "I'm sposta be in court but I've had this toothache for two weeks that needs emergency attention right now"
I've heard people say "sposed to" instead of "supposed to."
And I've heard them say "I hafta ..."
I can live with people saying those. It's when they spell them like that. . . Aargg.
My cousin writes “prolly” instead of probably when he’s texting. I find it sort of endearing because it’s him and I like him.
Post by: Metalcat on January 23, 2021, 08:50:29 AM
How about "sposta" ? "I'm sposta be in court but I've had this toothache for two weeks that needs emergency attention right now"
I've heard people say "sposed to" instead of "supposed to."
And I've heard them say "I hafta ..."
I can live with people saying those. It's when they spell them like that. . . Aargg.
My cousin writes “prolly” instead of probably when he’s texting. I find it sort of endearing because it’s him and I like him.
I had a very well written professor ex write "prolly" as well because he used a lot of cutesy text abbreviations. He's a very silly person, so it fit.
Post by: Dicey on January 23, 2021, 08:53:42 AM
Ugh. I hate prolly and ima. Ima= I am going to...
How about "sposta" ? "I'm sposta be in court but I've had this toothache for two weeks that needs emergency attention right now"
I've heard people say "sposed to" instead of "supposed to."
And I've heard them say "I hafta ..."
I can live with people saying those. It's when they spell them like that. . . Aargg.
My cousin writes “prolly” instead of probably when he’s texting. I find it sort of endearing because it’s him and I like him.
Post by: Metalcat on January 23, 2021, 09:16:58 AM
Ugh. I hate prolly and ima. Ima= I am going to...
How about "sposta" ? "I'm sposta be in court but I've had this toothache for two weeks that needs emergency attention right now"
I've heard people say "sposed to" instead of "supposed to."
And I've heard them say "I hafta ..."
I can live with people saying those. It's when they spell them like that. . . Aargg.
My cousin writes “prolly” instead of probably when he’s texting. I find it sort of endearing because it’s him and I like him.
I don't mind the abbreviations in text form because they can really help convey casual tone.
"What are you doing?" has a very different tone that "whatcha doin?"
Post by: Paul der Krake on January 23, 2021, 12:36:19 PM
I don't mind the abbreviations in text form because they can really help convey casual tone.
"What are you doing?" has a very different tone that "whatcha doin?"
(https://i.imgur.com/X5T7LEF.png)
Post by: GreenSheep on January 23, 2021, 06:28:51 PM
I don't mind the abbreviations in text form because they can really help convey casual tone.
"What are you doing?" has a very different tone that "whatcha doin?"
(https://i.imgur.com/X5T7LEF.png)
Haha, thanks for posting that and giving me a laugh! My brother's girlfriend moved to the US as an adult, and she learned her "real" (not textbook) English from "Friends," while I watched it as a native English-speaking American fan, many years before we met. So we bond over "Friends" jokes (among other things). I knew she was a keeper when she got the "pivot" comment I made when they were moving into their new house.
Post by: rmorris50 on January 23, 2021, 08:20:45 PM
To this day I try not to cringe when I hear people say I don’t get it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Chaplin on January 23, 2021, 08:33:11 PM
To this day I try not to cringe when I hear people say I don’t get it.
I get it, but it seems to be a bit of an overreaction.
Post by: nereo on January 24, 2021, 04:49:16 AM
I had an elementary school teacher who would get furious when we’d say “I don’t get it”. She’d say it’s “I don’t understand!”
To this day I try not to cringe when I hear people say I don’t get it.
To me, “I don’t get it” and “I don’t understand” convey distinctly different sentiments.
English teachers have long been prejudiced against the word “get”.
Post by: Dicey on January 24, 2021, 05:42:22 AM
Lol, I'm old, so I remember when cigarette advertising was far less restricted. The slogan, "Winston tastes good, like a cigarette should" incited much wailing and gnashing of English teacher teeth. Though the ad was effective, it was always used as an example of poor grammar. Funny, nowadays, It certainly would not have the same impact.I had an elementary school teacher who would get furious when we’d say “I don’t get it”. She’d say it’s “I don’t understand!”
To this day I try not to cringe when I hear people say I don’t get it.
To me, “I don’t get it” and “I don’t understand” convey distinctly different sentiments.
English teachers have long been prejudiced against the word “get”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_tastes_good_like_a_cigarette_should#Grammar_controversy
Post by: rmorris50 on January 24, 2021, 06:54:22 AM
That’s like, the craziest thing that I’ve, like, ever heard!Lol, I'm old, so I remember when cigarette advertising was far less restricted. The slogan, "Winston tastes good, like a cigarette should" incited much wailing and gnashing of English teacher teeth. Though the ad was effective, it was always used as an example of poor grammar. Funny, nowadays, It certainly would not have the same impact.I had an elementary school teacher who would get furious when we’d say “I don’t get it”. She’d say it’s “I don’t understand!”
To this day I try not to cringe when I hear people say I don’t get it.
To me, “I don’t get it” and “I don’t understand” convey distinctly different sentiments.
English teachers have long been prejudiced against the word “get”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_tastes_good_like_a_cigarette_should#Grammar_controversy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on January 24, 2021, 07:15:36 AM
I know descriptivists will say that this is just how language evolves...etc
While I can easily accept that as true, I don't know why people are so sanguine about it. It's intellectually lazy. E.g. - if we were to replace semi-colons with commas, there would be no difference between the short (phonetic and conceptual) pause indicated by a comma and the longer one signified by a semi-colon. And that would be a loss of nuance. Yet no one seems to care. Where are people's standards?
That has been your weekly grammatical rant from moi.
Also, while I'm at it, I get slightly, almost (but not quite) imperceptibly annoyed by tense mismatches.
I saw something in the paper today (it's meant to be a decent paper but I think they fired all their editors in a cost-cutting thing) that said, "Since Bush's election in 2004, I thought about this issue..." - of course it should have been "I've been thinking about this issue" not "I thought". Or you could have kept the "I thought" and changed "Since" to "After".
I'm not trying to be unnecessarily nitpicky - the tense dislocation genuinely makes my brain skip a beat when I read it.
Post by: rmorris50 on January 24, 2021, 07:20:24 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Metalcat on January 24, 2021, 07:50:24 AM
I also cringe at “you know what I mean?”. It’s a terrible elicitor.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's because it's meant as a passive aggressive signal for consensus. It's a fantastic linguistic tool for pushing people to essentially agree when they are hesitant to. I used it all the time with patients, because to disagree means to clarify that you do understand, but don't agree, and that creates a lot of conversational friction.
It's a pain in the ass to the listener, but an effective tool for the speaker if they are looking to subtly control the conversation.
Post by: GreenSheep on January 24, 2021, 08:32:15 AM
I also cringe at “you know what I mean?”. It’s a terrible elicitor.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's because it's meant as a passive aggressive signal for consensus. It's a fantastic linguistic tool for pushing people to essentially agree when they are hesitant to. I used it all the time with patients, because to disagree means to clarify that you do understand, but don't agree, and that creates a lot of conversational friction.
It's a pain in the ass to the listener, but an effective tool for the speaker if they are looking to subtly control the conversation.
So that's why it often sounds bossy to me and I could never quite put my finger on why. On the other hand, depending on the speaker, and especially when overused, sometimes it sounds to me like a nervous person looking for reassurance.
Post by: Metalcat on January 24, 2021, 09:19:21 AM
I also cringe at “you know what I mean?”. It’s a terrible elicitor.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's because it's meant as a passive aggressive signal for consensus. It's a fantastic linguistic tool for pushing people to essentially agree when they are hesitant to. I used it all the time with patients, because to disagree means to clarify that you do understand, but don't agree, and that creates a lot of conversational friction.
It's a pain in the ass to the listener, but an effective tool for the speaker if they are looking to subtly control the conversation.
So that's why it often sounds bossy to me and I could never quite put my finger on why. On the other hand, depending on the speaker, and especially when overused, sometimes it sounds to me like a nervous person looking for reassurance.
It's both, because both are doing the same thing. The nervous person is trying to trigger the exact same reaction as the assertive person. They're trying to make it uncomfortable for you to not express understanding of their position.
It's right there in the language: "you know what I mean"
It's specifically structured to make dissent less likely without being direct that that's what they're doing.
Post by: rmorris50 on January 24, 2021, 09:56:00 AM
Yeah, but this can lead to just more breakdown in communication. If I don’t care what you’re saying, I respond with “sure”, or “whatever you say”. If I do care, I respond with “so if I understand you correctly, you’re saying x, y, z” and then make the person clarify.I also cringe at “you know what I mean?”. It’s a terrible elicitor.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's because it's meant as a passive aggressive signal for consensus. It's a fantastic linguistic tool for pushing people to essentially agree when they are hesitant to. I used it all the time with patients, because to disagree means to clarify that you do understand, but don't agree, and that creates a lot of conversational friction.
It's a pain in the ass to the listener, but an effective tool for the speaker if they are looking to subtly control the conversation.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Morning Glory on January 24, 2021, 10:00:43 AM
I also cringe at “you know what I mean?”. It’s a terrible elicitor.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's because it's meant as a passive aggressive signal for consensus. It's a fantastic linguistic tool for pushing people to essentially agree when they are hesitant to. I used it all the time with patients, because to disagree means to clarify that you do understand, but don't agree, and that creates a lot of conversational friction.
It's a pain in the ass to the listener, but an effective tool for the speaker if they are looking to subtly control the conversation.
So that's why it often sounds bossy to me and I could never quite put my finger on why. On the other hand, depending on the speaker, and especially when overused, sometimes it sounds to me like a nervous person looking for reassurance.
It's both, because both are doing the same thing. The nervous person is trying to trigger the exact same reaction as the assertive person. They're trying to make it uncomfortable for you to not express understanding of their position.
It's right there in the language: "you know what I mean"
It's specifically structured to make dissent less likely without being direct that that's what they're doing.
I'm starting to think you are a sociopath, Malcat.
I always took "you know what I mean" to be a slightly annoying verbal tic meant to fill silence, nothing diabolical. A regional variant is "dontcha know"
Post by: sui generis on January 24, 2021, 10:30:32 AM
I also cringe at “you know what I mean?”. It’s a terrible elicitor.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's because it's meant as a passive aggressive signal for consensus. It's a fantastic linguistic tool for pushing people to essentially agree when they are hesitant to. I used it all the time with patients, because to disagree means to clarify that you do understand, but don't agree, and that creates a lot of conversational friction.
It's a pain in the ass to the listener, but an effective tool for the speaker if they are looking to subtly control the conversation.
So that's why it often sounds bossy to me and I could never quite put my finger on why. On the other hand, depending on the speaker, and especially when overused, sometimes it sounds to me like a nervous person looking for reassurance.
It's both, because both are doing the same thing. The nervous person is trying to trigger the exact same reaction as the assertive person. They're trying to make it uncomfortable for you to not express understanding of their position.
It's right there in the language: "you know what I mean"
It's specifically structured to make dissent less likely without being direct that that's what they're doing.
I'm starting to think you are a sociopath, Malcat.
I always took "you know what I mean" to be a slightly annoying verbal tic meant to fill silence, nothing diabolical. A regional variant is "dontcha know"
Oh, it's definitely that for some people.
Something I can't stand that I feel like started with Barack Obama (someone I otherwise admire) is starting off sentences, typically responses to questions, with "Listen". Yeah, don't tell me what to do! I asked you a question, I am not gonna NOT listen to your answer!
I found it sensible on those occasions when someone is being disingenuous with their question or is being sarcastic or something and the "Listen" is meant to imply something to the effect of "Let's not play these games; here's the bottom line . . . " But when you start off nearly every response with "Listen"(Nate Silver does this a lot as well, on his podcast) it starts to grate on me, like they think the questioner is always being disingenuous and they are constantly in a defensive posture.
Post by: Metalcat on January 24, 2021, 11:05:49 AM
I also cringe at “you know what I mean?”. It’s a terrible elicitor.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's because it's meant as a passive aggressive signal for consensus. It's a fantastic linguistic tool for pushing people to essentially agree when they are hesitant to. I used it all the time with patients, because to disagree means to clarify that you do understand, but don't agree, and that creates a lot of conversational friction.
It's a pain in the ass to the listener, but an effective tool for the speaker if they are looking to subtly control the conversation.
So that's why it often sounds bossy to me and I could never quite put my finger on why. On the other hand, depending on the speaker, and especially when overused, sometimes it sounds to me like a nervous person looking for reassurance.
It's both, because both are doing the same thing. The nervous person is trying to trigger the exact same reaction as the assertive person. They're trying to make it uncomfortable for you to not express understanding of their position.
It's right there in the language: "you know what I mean"
It's specifically structured to make dissent less likely without being direct that that's what they're doing.
I'm starting to think you are a sociopath, Malcat.
I always took "you know what I mean" to be a slightly annoying verbal tic meant to fill silence, nothing diabolical. A regional variant is "dontcha know"
Lol, not a sociopath. I would be a lot richer if I was.
It's not diabolical to have intention behind what we say. We all do it, most people just aren't conscious of it.
All speaking is meant to convey information and/or persuade the thinking or behaviour of the listener. It's not diabolical, it's the entire point of talking to someone.
Nothing anyone says is devoid of intention.
Am I freakishly good at maneuvering people towards behaviour I want from them? Absolutely. Is that diabolical? Not unless my intentions are, and as a medical professional, I was usually just trying to get people to take basic care of their own bodies and those of their children.
We want doctors to be persuasive. Most aren't, which is actually a bad thing for society.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on January 24, 2021, 07:13:52 PM
I had an elementary school teacher who would get furious when we’d say “I don’t get it”. She’d say it’s “I don’t understand!”
To this day I try not to cringe when I hear people say I don’t get it.
To me, “I don’t get it” and “I don’t understand” convey distinctly different sentiments.
I agree.
I think "I don't get it" usually means that the person uttering it does understand the issue, matter, or situation, (the "it") but their understanding is such that there's something about the "it" that doesn't "make sense" to them.
For example, A and B are wealthy neighbors.
B is caught shoplifting a $1 item and when A finds out he says to his wife "I don't get it."
A understands exactly what B has done but his wrongdoing doesn't "make sense" to A because A knows B is wealthy which obviates any need for him to shoplift.
Post by: Dicey on January 24, 2021, 11:50:35 PM
Um, no. Using "like" as a verbal tic is a whole different conversation. In this case, it was the use of the word "like" instead of "as", which supports my last sentence above.That’s like, the craziest thing that I’ve, like, ever heard!Lol, I'm old, so I remember when cigarette advertising was far less restricted. The slogan, "Winston tastes good, like a cigarette should" incited much wailing and gnashing of English teacher teeth. Though the ad was effective, it was always used as an example of poor grammar. Funny, nowadays, It certainly would not have the same impact.I had an elementary school teacher who would get furious when we’d say “I don’t get it”. She’d say it’s “I don’t understand!”
To this day I try not to cringe when I hear people say I don’t get it.
To me, “I don’t get it” and “I don’t understand” convey distinctly different sentiments.
English teachers have long been prejudiced against the word “get”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_tastes_good_like_a_cigarette_should#Grammar_controversy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And if @Malcat is a sociopath, God help us all, lol.
Post by: merula on January 25, 2021, 07:05:52 AM
The American use of "anymore" to mean "nowadays" is confusing and strange to me
On the other hand, I love using the phrase "come with" which is probably the same type of thing.
I live in Minnesota which is probably the world capital of "come with" and "go with", and my German teachers pointed out that that structure would be grammatically correct in German, Swedish and Norwegian, which were the major immigrant groups to Minnesota. (This is also the source of the long vowels of the typical Minnesota accent, dooonchaah knoow?)
Could you give examples of sentences with "go with" and "come with"? I'm not seeing a problem with them, so I'm guessing it is how they are used in a sentence that bothers people.
"I'm going to the store, want to come with?"
Aah, they are being lazy and leaving out the last "me". Or being energetic, I would be fine with "I'm going to the store, want to come?" The "with me" being implied.
Not lazy or energetic, just a dialectical variant common to certain regions, the same way that "let's go back to mine" isn't just a lazy version of "let's go back to my place", or "go to hospital" isn't a lazy version of "go to the hospital". They're just variants that aren't common in North America.
Yes, this. It has a different connotation. You *can* say "come with me", but that means you're emphasizing the "me" in a way that "come with" doesn't have, and that isn't understood as the same emphasis in areas where "come with me" is standard.
I don't know Swedish or Norwegian, but the German verbs are "mitkommen" and "mitgehen", literally come with and go with, and they can be correctly used either transitively or intransitively. The immigrants just applied the same rule to English.
Post by: Dicey on January 25, 2021, 07:07:38 AM
Post by: Metalcat on January 25, 2021, 07:08:21 AM
Um, no. Using "like" as a verbal tic is a whole different conversation. In this case, it was the use of the word "like" instead of "as", which supports my last sentence above.That’s like, the craziest thing that I’ve, like, ever heard!Lol, I'm old, so I remember when cigarette advertising was far less restricted. The slogan, "Winston tastes good, like a cigarette should" incited much wailing and gnashing of English teacher teeth. Though the ad was effective, it was always used as an example of poor grammar. Funny, nowadays, It certainly would not have the same impact.I had an elementary school teacher who would get furious when we’d say “I don’t get it”. She’d say it’s “I don’t understand!”
To this day I try not to cringe when I hear people say I don’t get it.
To me, “I don’t get it” and “I don’t understand” convey distinctly different sentiments.
English teachers have long been prejudiced against the word “get”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_tastes_good_like_a_cigarette_should#Grammar_controversy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And if @Malcat is a sociopath, God help us all, lol.
Ugh, it really would make my life so much easier though.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 25, 2021, 09:41:36 AM
Today, on this very forum: "buku bucks". Argh!!!
I suppose it should be Buku bucks? Whatever Buku is?
Or did they mean beaucoup? Which is not pronounced buku.
Post by: Dicey on January 25, 2021, 09:47:13 AM
Exactly.Today, on this very forum: "buku bucks". Argh!!!
I suppose it should be Buku bucks? Whatever Buku is?
Or did they mean beaucoup? Which is not pronounced buku.
Post by: Jouer on January 25, 2021, 10:19:22 AM
How about "sposta" ? "I'm sposta be in court but I've had this toothache for two weeks that needs emergency attention right now"
I've heard people say "sposed to" instead of "supposed to."
And I've heard them say "I hafta ..."
I can live with people saying those. It's when they spell them like that. . . Aargg.
HA! I'm from Newfoundland. My phone has learned where to correctly place the apostrophe in s'pose and b'y. You'll drag both from my cold dead hand. : )
Post by: Freedomin5 on January 25, 2021, 10:28:28 AM
Exactly.Today, on this very forum: "buku bucks". Argh!!!
I suppose it should be Buku bucks? Whatever Buku is?
Or did they mean beaucoup? Which is not pronounced buku.
I’m still confused. What are beaucoup bucks? Are they trying to say “a lot of money”, but mixing English slang with French?
Post by: Dicey on January 25, 2021, 10:34:43 AM
Apparently so: https://www.dictionary.com/e/word-of-the-day/beaucoup-2020-01-09/Exactly.Today, on this very forum: "buku bucks". Argh!!!
I suppose it should be Buku bucks? Whatever Buku is?
Or did they mean beaucoup? Which is not pronounced buku.
I’m still confused. What are beaucoup bucks? Are they trying to say “a lot of money”, but mixing English slang with French?
Post by: Morning Glory on January 25, 2021, 12:48:01 PM
Exactly.Today, on this very forum: "buku bucks". Argh!!!
I suppose it should be Buku bucks? Whatever Buku is?
Or did they mean beaucoup? Which is not pronounced buku.
I’m still confused. What are beaucoup bucks? Are they trying to say “a lot of money”, but mixing English slang with French?
Yes. This is something my mom and her relatives said a lot when I was growing up. She pronounced it "buku" but knew it was spelled "beaucoup". She is from NYC.
Post by: nereo on January 25, 2021, 02:12:45 PM
Today, on this very forum: "buku bucks". Argh!!!
I suppose it should be Buku bucks? Whatever Buku is?
Or did they mean beaucoup? Which is not pronounced buku.
I always assumed it was beaucoup. That’s how it sounds when I hear it. Is that not the case?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 25, 2021, 02:26:21 PM
Exactly.Today, on this very forum: "buku bucks". Argh!!!
I suppose it should be Buku bucks? Whatever Buku is?
Or did they mean beaucoup? Which is not pronounced buku.
I’m still confused. What are beaucoup bucks? Are they trying to say “a lot of money”, but mixing English slang with French?
Yes. This is something my mom and her relatives said a lot when I was growing up. She pronounced it "buku" but knew it was spelled "beaucoup". She is from NYC.
People play with words. When I was a kid we would say mercy buckets, our fun English known mispronunciation of Merci beaucoup. Usually for sarcasm.
And autocratic carrot (autocorrect being weird) thinks beaucoup should be spelled backup.
Post by: Dollar Slice on January 25, 2021, 03:24:44 PM
autocratic carrot
... Did your autocorrect just turn "autocarrot" into a new nickname for Trump, the orangest dictator? LOL.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 25, 2021, 04:42:48 PM
autocratic carrot
... Did your autocorrect just turn "autocarrot" into a new nickname for Trump, the orangest dictator? LOL.
Naw, someone elsewhere had trouble with it and ended up with autocarrot. Then autocarrot turned autocarrot into autocratic, but I wanted to keep the carrot. I had to fix those first 2 autocarrots, you know what they turned into. ;-)
Post by: Dicey on January 26, 2021, 06:45:56 AM
I'd forgotten that one! That trip wire led my brain to "Mairzy Doats", which now won't leave my head. Because this snippet of a nonsense song dates from the forties, even before my time, I've included the lyrics:Exactly.Today, on this very forum: "buku bucks". Argh!!!
I suppose it should be Buku bucks? Whatever Buku is?
Or did they mean beaucoup? Which is not pronounced buku.
I’m still confused. What are beaucoup bucks? Are they trying to say “a lot of money”, but mixing English slang with French?
Yes. This is something my mom and her relatives said a lot when I was growing up. She pronounced it "buku" but knew it was spelled "beaucoup". She is from NYC.
People play with words. When I was a kid we would say mercy buckets, our fun English known mispronunciation of Merci beaucoup. Usually for sarcasm.
And autocratic carrot (autocorrect being weird) thinks beaucoup should be spelled backup.
Mairzy doats and dozy doats and liddle lamzy divey
A kiddley divey too, wouldn't you?
Hint: say it aloud. Bonus points if you can sing it.
Post by: Metalcat on January 26, 2021, 06:51:13 AM
I'd forgotten that one! That trip wire led my brain to "Mairzy Doats", which now won't leave my head. Because this snippet of a nonsense song dates from the forties, even before my time, I've included the lyrics:Exactly.Today, on this very forum: "buku bucks". Argh!!!
I suppose it should be Buku bucks? Whatever Buku is?
Or did they mean beaucoup? Which is not pronounced buku.
I’m still confused. What are beaucoup bucks? Are they trying to say “a lot of money”, but mixing English slang with French?
Yes. This is something my mom and her relatives said a lot when I was growing up. She pronounced it "buku" but knew it was spelled "beaucoup". She is from NYC.
People play with words. When I was a kid we would say mercy buckets, our fun English known mispronunciation of Merci beaucoup. Usually for sarcasm.
And autocratic carrot (autocorrect being weird) thinks beaucoup should be spelled backup.
Mairzy doats and dozy doats and liddle lamzy divey
A kiddley divey too, wouldn't you?
Hint: say it aloud. Bonus points if you can sing it.
OH FUCK OFF!!!!
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW HARD IT IS FOR ME TO GET THAT FUCKING EAR WORM OUT OF MY HEAD!!??????
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!
[Note: it's 100% Dickey's fault if this tips me into becoming a full on sociopath BTW.]
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 26, 2021, 08:09:38 AM
I'd forgotten that one! That trip wire led my brain to "Mairzy Doats", which now won't leave my head. Because this snippet of a nonsense song dates from the forties, even before my time, I've included the lyrics:Exactly.Today, on this very forum: "buku bucks". Argh!!!
I suppose it should be Buku bucks? Whatever Buku is?
Or did they mean beaucoup? Which is not pronounced buku.
I’m still confused. What are beaucoup bucks? Are they trying to say “a lot of money”, but mixing English slang with French?
Yes. This is something my mom and her relatives said a lot when I was growing up. She pronounced it "buku" but knew it was spelled "beaucoup". She is from NYC.
People play with words. When I was a kid we would say mercy buckets, our fun English known mispronunciation of Merci beaucoup. Usually for sarcasm.
And autocratic carrot (autocorrect being weird) thinks beaucoup should be spelled backup.
Mairzy doats and dozy doats and liddle lamzy divey
A kiddley divey too, wouldn't you?
Hint: say it aloud. Bonus points if you can sing it.
A friend's choir sang it one year for Christmas singalongs at seniors residences. So I sang with her for practice. It's weird to sing, you want to say it "properly".
Post by: LaineyAZ on January 26, 2021, 08:10:37 AM
That's because it's meant as a passive aggressive signal for consensus. It's a fantastic linguistic tool for pushing people to essentially agree when they are hesitant to. I used it all the time with patients, because to disagree means to clarify that you do understand, but don't agree, and that creates a lot of conversational friction.
It's a pain in the ass to the listener, but an effective tool for the speaker if they are looking to subtly control the conversation.
[/quote]
So that's why it often sounds bossy to me and I could never quite put my finger on why. On the other hand, depending on the speaker, and especially when overused, sometimes it sounds to me like a nervous person looking for reassurance.
[/quote]
[/quote]
...
I always took "you know what I mean" to be a slightly annoying verbal tic meant to fill silence, nothing diabolical. A regional variant is "dontcha know"
[/quote]
Oh, it's definitely that for some people.
Something I can't stand that I feel like started with Barack Obama (someone I otherwise admire) is starting off sentences, typically responses to questions, with "Listen". Yeah, don't tell me what to do! I asked you a question, I am not gonna NOT listen to your answer!
I found it sensible on those occasions when someone is being disingenuous with their question or is being sarcastic or something and the "Listen" is meant to imply something to the effect of "Let's not play these games; here's the bottom line . . . " But when you start off nearly every response with "Listen"(Nate Silver does this a lot as well, on his podcast) it starts to grate on me, like they think the questioner is always being disingenuous and they are constantly in a defensive posture.
[/quote]
I agree with this! I remember Rush Limbaugh and others of his ilk who would answer questions this way. To me it was a figurative hand-waving away of the original question so that they could re-direct the answer to something they wanted to say. I've noticed many politicians do this too.
Limbaugh also had another verbal trick where he'd say something like, "Listen, it's simple, ....." and then present "facts" in a black and white way, no gray areas or subtleties or complications and his audience ate it up.
Post by: solon on January 26, 2021, 08:22:45 AM
Quote
QuoteQuoteQuote...QuoteQuote[quote ...
That's because it's meant as a passive aggressive signal for consensus. It's a fantastic linguistic tool for pushing people to essentially agree when they are hesitant to. I used it all the time with patients, because to disagree means to clarify that you do understand, but don't agree, and that creates a lot of conversational friction.
It's a pain in the ass to the listener, but an effective tool for the speaker if they are looking to subtly control the conversation.
So that's why it often sounds bossy to me and I could never quite put my finger on why. On the other hand, depending on the speaker, and especially when overused, sometimes it sounds to me like a nervous person looking for reassurance.
I always took "you know what I mean" to be a slightly annoying verbal tic meant to fill silence, nothing diabolical. A regional variant is "dontcha know"
Oh, it's definitely that for some people.
Something I can't stand that I feel like started with Barack Obama (someone I otherwise admire) is starting off sentences, typically responses to questions, with "Listen". Yeah, don't tell me what to do! I asked you a question, I am not gonna NOT listen to your answer!
I found it sensible on those occasions when someone is being disingenuous with their question or is being sarcastic or something and the "Listen" is meant to imply something to the effect of "Let's not play these games; here's the bottom line . . . " But when you start off nearly every response with "Listen"(Nate Silver does this a lot as well, on his podcast) it starts to grate on me, like they think the questioner is always being disingenuous and they are constantly in a defensive posture.
I agree with this! I remember Rush Limbaugh and others of his ilk who would answer questions this way. To me it was a figurative hand-waving away of the original question so that they could re-direct the answer to something they wanted to say. I've noticed many politicians do this too.
Limbaugh also had another verbal trick where he'd say something like, "Listen, it's simple, ....." and then present "facts" in a black and white way, no gray areas or subtleties or complications and his audience ate it up.
You know what else is simple? Quoting.
Post by: Dicey on January 26, 2021, 08:29:48 AM
A-HAHAHAHA! Sorry folks, our beloved, borderline sociopath @Malcat has won all the bonus points for today.[People play with words. When I was a kid we would say mercy buckets, our fun English known mispronunciation of Merci beaucoup. Usually for sarcasm.I'd forgotten that one! That trip wire led my brain to "Mairzy Doats", which now won't leave my head. Because this snippet of a nonsense song dates from the forties, even before my time, I've included the lyrics:
And autocratic carrot (autocorrect being weird) thinks beaucoup should be spelled backup.
Mairzy doats and dozy doats and liddle lamzy divey
A kiddley divey too, wouldn't you?
Hint: say it aloud. Bonus points if you can sing it.
OH FUCK OFF!!!!
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW HARD IT IS FOR ME TO GET THAT FUCKING EAR WORM OUT OF MY HEAD!!??????
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!
[Note: it's 100% Dickey's fault if this tips me into becoming a full on sociopath BTW.]
And who the fuck is Dickey? I want all the credit for driving you over the edge, not that Dick asshole.
At least I know my earworm and I are in
Post by: Metalcat on January 26, 2021, 08:35:42 AM
A-HAHAHAHA! Sorry folks, our beloved, borderline sociopath @Malcat has won all the bonus points for today.[People play with words. When I was a kid we would say mercy buckets, our fun English known mispronunciation of Merci beaucoup. Usually for sarcasm.I'd forgotten that one! That trip wire led my brain to "Mairzy Doats", which now won't leave my head. Because this snippet of a nonsense song dates from the forties, even before my time, I've included the lyrics:
And autocratic carrot (autocorrect being weird) thinks beaucoup should be spelled backup.
Mairzy doats and dozy doats and liddle lamzy divey
A kiddley divey too, wouldn't you?
Hint: say it aloud. Bonus points if you can sing it.
OH FUCK OFF!!!!
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW HARD IT IS FOR ME TO GET THAT FUCKING EAR WORM OUT OF MY HEAD!!??????
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!
[Note: it's 100% Dickey's fault if this tips me into becoming a full on sociopath BTW.]
And who the fuck is Dickey? I want all the credit for driving you over the edge, not that Dick asshole.
At least I know my earworm and I are ingoodexcellentoutstanding company. Thanks for that, Malcat.
God damn autocorrect, but it was apropos, 'cuz you're a total dick for doing that, lol.
Oh and THANKS TO YOU I will now have "Girl From Ipanema" in my head for fucking WEEKS as it's the only auditory neurological poison powerful enough to drown out the Gitmo-grade torture of the monstrosity you triggered in my temporal cortex.
Kiss my tall and tan and young and lovely ass!
Post by: simonsez on January 26, 2021, 10:25:07 AM
Sorry to pick on a single person, @Malcat but your example using apropos in the last post made me pause and think. I've heard apropos is not synonymous with appropriate but I admit I don't have the full grasp on how they're different. Maybe this has changed and is now more acceptable to use appropriate and apropos more interchangeably? Or it could be a regional thing?
Post by: Metalcat on January 26, 2021, 10:57:27 AM
I'll be honest, some grammar stuff goes over my head and I don't see what the issue is and then other things (that are perhaps simple/unimportant to others) grate me to no end.
Sorry to pick on a single person, @Malcat but your example using apropos in the last post made me pause and think. I've heard apropos is not synonymous with appropriate but I admit I don't have the full grasp on how they're different. Maybe this has changed and is now more acceptable to use appropriate and apropos more interchangeably? Or it could be a regional thing?
They're very similar, but not exactly the same.
Apropos is to be appropriate to a situation. So it's appropriate to the situation that autocorrect put "Dick" into Dicey's name in my psycho ranting post.
But I wouldn't say the following: "it's not apropos to call Dicey a Dick for infecting me with an ear worm from hell because that's rude and she's my friend"
Post by: Chaplin on January 26, 2021, 11:42:54 AM
Post by: Frugal Lizard on January 26, 2021, 12:42:35 PM
thank you for making me giggle out loud.I'll be honest, some grammar stuff goes over my head and I don't see what the issue is and then other things (that are perhaps simple/unimportant to others) grate me to no end.
Sorry to pick on a single person, @Malcat but your example using apropos in the last post made me pause and think. I've heard apropos is not synonymous with appropriate but I admit I don't have the full grasp on how they're different. Maybe this has changed and is now more acceptable to use appropriate and apropos more interchangeably? Or it could be a regional thing?
They're very similar, but not exactly the same.
Apropos is to be appropriate to a situation. So it's appropriate to the situation that autocorrect put "Dick" into Dicey's name in my psycho ranting post.
But I wouldn't say the following: "it's not apropos to call Dicey a Dick for infecting me with an ear worm from hell because that's rude and she's my friend"
Post by: dignam on January 26, 2021, 01:34:48 PM
The American use of "anymore" to mean "nowadays" is confusing and strange to me
On the other hand, I love using the phrase "come with" which is probably the same type of thing.
I live in Minnesota which is probably the world capital of "come with" and "go with", and my German teachers pointed out that that structure would be grammatically correct in German, Swedish and Norwegian, which were the major immigrant groups to Minnesota. (This is also the source of the long vowels of the typical Minnesota accent, dooonchaah knoow?)
I'll also notice people in Wisconsin/Minnesota using the verb "borrow" for both borrowing and lending, as there is no distinction in German. Not sure about Norwegian and Swedish, but I would guess it's the same deal. It's usually older folks doing it.
Post by: Dicey on January 26, 2021, 01:38:31 PM
You'd think I wrote the damn song!I'll be honest, some grammar stuff goes over my head and I don't see what the issue is and then other things (that are perhaps simple/unimportant to others) grate me to no end.
Sorry to pick on a single person, @Malcat but your example using apropos in the last post made me pause and think. I've heard apropos is not synonymous with appropriate but I admit I don't have the full grasp on how they're different. Maybe this has changed and is now more acceptable to use appropriate and apropos more interchangeably? Or it could be a regional thing?
They're very similar, but not exactly the same.
Apropos is to be appropriate to a situation. So it's appropriate to the situation that autocorrect put "Dick" into Dicey's name in my psycho ranting post.
But I wouldn't say the following: "it's not apropos to call Dicey a Dick for infecting me with an ear worm from hell because that's rude and she's my friend"
Post by: Metalcat on January 26, 2021, 01:50:02 PM
You'd think I wrote the damn song!I'll be honest, some grammar stuff goes over my head and I don't see what the issue is and then other things (that are perhaps simple/unimportant to others) grate me to no end.
Sorry to pick on a single person, @Malcat but your example using apropos in the last post made me pause and think. I've heard apropos is not synonymous with appropriate but I admit I don't have the full grasp on how they're different. Maybe this has changed and is now more acceptable to use appropriate and apropos more interchangeably? Or it could be a regional thing?
They're very similar, but not exactly the same.
Apropos is to be appropriate to a situation. So it's appropriate to the situation that autocorrect put "Dick" into Dicey's name in my psycho ranting post.
But I wouldn't say the following: "it's not apropos to call Dicey a Dick for infecting me with an ear worm from hell because that's rude and she's my friend"
Do we have conclusive evidence that you didn't? I've never seen any, so I'm as yet unconvinced.
Post by: merula on January 26, 2021, 02:34:01 PM
The American use of "anymore" to mean "nowadays" is confusing and strange to me
On the other hand, I love using the phrase "come with" which is probably the same type of thing.
I live in Minnesota which is probably the world capital of "come with" and "go with", and my German teachers pointed out that that structure would be grammatically correct in German, Swedish and Norwegian, which were the major immigrant groups to Minnesota. (This is also the source of the long vowels of the typical Minnesota accent, dooonchaah knoow?)
I'll also notice people in Wisconsin/Minnesota using the verb "borrow" for both borrowing and lending, as there is no distinction in German. Not sure about Norwegian and Swedish, but I would guess it's the same deal. It's usually older folks doing it.
This was literally my first lesson in English class upon moving to Minnesota mid-school-year and, not gonna lie, I was appalled at first. I'm pretty scrupulous about lend vs loan, too, which puts me distinctly in the minority here.
I think you're right about it being older folks, I haven't heard it from kids or even folks my own (middle) age in a long time.
Post by: Paul der Krake on January 26, 2021, 02:38:46 PM
Post by: nessness on January 26, 2021, 03:25:00 PM
All this poorly executed cultural appropriation of the French language is making me very upset, another specialty of ours. You anglos need to stick to your own damn words.Eh, the French borrow plenty of English words too.
Le week-end
Le camping
Le parking
Le wi-fi
Probably a whole lot more, as I don't know that much French.
Post by: dignam on January 26, 2021, 03:42:27 PM
Post by: nereo on January 26, 2021, 04:01:30 PM
English is basically a collection of words borrowed from other languages, not just French.Most languages are this way - particularly ones with origins in Europe. It’s not just English borrowing from others, language has been a multidirectional Highway for millennia.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on January 26, 2021, 04:18:34 PM
All this poorly executed cultural appropriation of the French language is making me very upset, another specialty of ours. You anglos need to stick to your own damn words.
You should hear kids in Quebec who are neither francophone nor anglophone They can pop French, English and language #3 into one sentence. ;-)
Post by: Metalcat on January 26, 2021, 04:35:06 PM
All this poorly executed cultural appropriation of the French language is making me very upset, another specialty of ours. You anglos need to stick to your own damn words.
You should hear kids in Quebec who are neither francophone nor anglophone They can pop French, English and language #3 into one sentence. ;-)
"Maman! Maman! Check ça! Check ça! Oh c'est cute là! C'est cute non?"
Post by: nereo on January 26, 2021, 04:41:40 PM
Post by: Dicey on January 26, 2021, 05:37:48 PM
If you ever heard me sing, you'd need no further convincing. In a true sign of my love for you, I promise I'll never sing to you. You may think seeing is believing, but I assure you, hearing is believing, lol.You'd think I wrote the damn song!I'll be honest, some grammar stuff goes over my head and I don't see what the issue is and then other things (that are perhaps simple/unimportant to others) grate me to no end.
Sorry to pick on a single person, @Malcat but your example using apropos in the last post made me pause and think. I've heard apropos is not synonymous with appropriate but I admit I don't have the full grasp on how they're different. Maybe this has changed and is now more acceptable to use appropriate and apropos more interchangeably? Or it could be a regional thing?
They're very similar, but not exactly the same.
Apropos is to be appropriate to a situation. So it's appropriate to the situation that autocorrect put "Dick" into Dicey's name in my psycho ranting post.
But I wouldn't say the following: "it's not apropos to call Dicey a Dick for infecting me with an ear worm from hell because that's rude and she's my friend"
Do we have conclusive evidence that you didn't? I've never seen any, so I'm as yet unconvinced.
Also, I may be old to some of you young whippersnappers, but I wasn't gracing this earth in the early 1940's when it first became popular. What became popular in the forties? Why it's Mairzy Doats and...
Now get off my lawn! The goats are hungry!!! They haven't had this much of a workout in years.
Post by: Paul der Krake on January 26, 2021, 06:04:17 PM
For extra credit, alternate putting a space before the exclamation mark, like this:All this poorly executed cultural appropriation of the French language is making me very upset, another specialty of ours. You anglos need to stick to your own damn words.
You should hear kids in Quebec who are neither francophone nor anglophone They can pop French, English and language #3 into one sentence. ;-)
"Maman! Maman! Check ça! Check ça! Oh c'est cute là! C'est cute non?"
"Maman! Maman! Check ça ! Check ça! Oh c'est cute là! C'est cute non ?"
Post by: Morning Glory on January 26, 2021, 07:47:47 PM
If you ever heard me sing, you'd need no further convincing. In a true sign of my love for you, I promise I'll never sing to you. You may think seeing is believing, but I assure you, hearing is believing, lol.You'd think I wrote the damn song!I'll be honest, some grammar stuff goes over my head and I don't see what the issue is and then other things (that are perhaps simple/unimportant to others) grate me to no end.
Sorry to pick on a single person, @Malcat but your example using apropos in the last post made me pause and think. I've heard apropos is not synonymous with appropriate but I admit I don't have the full grasp on how they're different. Maybe this has changed and is now more acceptable to use appropriate and apropos more interchangeably? Or it could be a regional thing?
They're very similar, but not exactly the same.
Apropos is to be appropriate to a situation. So it's appropriate to the situation that autocorrect put "Dick" into Dicey's name in my psycho ranting post.
But I wouldn't say the following: "it's not apropos to call Dicey a Dick for infecting me with an ear worm from hell because that's rude and she's my friend"
Do we have conclusive evidence that you didn't? I've never seen any, so I'm as yet unconvinced.
Also, I may be old to some of you young whippersnappers, but I wasn't gracing this earth in the early 1940's when it first became popular. What became popular in the forties? Why it's Mairzy Doats and...
Now get off my lawn! The goats are hungry!!! They haven't had this much of a workout in years.
I'm butting in here again with an even older one (1840's???) and some jam for the goats:
Caesar adsum iam forte, Brutus ad erat. Caesar sic in omnibus. Brutus in... I can't remember the last word, help me out here.
Post by: Dicey on January 26, 2021, 10:27:51 PM
Brutus sic in at. Dog Latin. I only know this because of Google, but it made me miss my dad. He was a graduate of Cambridge High and Latin School. He surely could have completed it from memory. I miss him. RIP, "Pops".If you ever heard me sing, you'd need no further convincing. In a true sign of my love for you, I promise I'll never sing to you. You may think seeing is believing, but I assure you, hearing is believing, lol.You'd think I wrote the damn song!I'll be honest, some grammar stuff goes over my head and I don't see what the issue is and then other things (that are perhaps simple/unimportant to others) grate me to no end.
Sorry to pick on a single person, @Malcat but your example using apropos in the last post made me pause and think. I've heard apropos is not synonymous with appropriate but I admit I don't have the full grasp on how they're different. Maybe this has changed and is now more acceptable to use appropriate and apropos more interchangeably? Or it could be a regional thing?
They're very similar, but not exactly the same.
Apropos is to be appropriate to a situation. So it's appropriate to the situation that autocorrect put "Dick" into Dicey's name in my psycho ranting post.
But I wouldn't say the following: "it's not apropos to call Dicey a Dick for infecting me with an ear worm from hell because that's rude and she's my friend"
Do we have conclusive evidence that you didn't? I've never seen any, so I'm as yet unconvinced.
Also, I may be old to some of you young whippersnappers, but I wasn't gracing this earth in the early 1940's when it first became popular. What became popular in the forties? Why it's Mairzy Doats and...
Now get off my lawn! The goats are hungry!!! They haven't had this much of a workout in years.
I'm butting in here again with an even older one (1840's???) and some jam for the goats:
Caesar adsum iam forte, Brutus ad erat. Caesar sic in omnibus. Brutus in... I can't remember the last word, help me out here.
Post by: Morning Glory on January 27, 2021, 05:31:59 AM
Brutus sic in at. Dog Latin. I only know this because of Google, but it made me miss my dad. He was a graduate of Cambridge High and Latin School. He surely could have completed it from memory. I miss him. RIP, "Pops".If you ever heard me sing, you'd need no further convincing. In a true sign of my love for you, I promise I'll never sing to you. You may think seeing is believing, but I assure you, hearing is believing, lol.You'd think I wrote the damn song!I'll be honest, some grammar stuff goes over my head and I don't see what the issue is and then other things (that are perhaps simple/unimportant to others) grate me to no end.
Sorry to pick on a single person, @Malcat but your example using apropos in the last post made me pause and think. I've heard apropos is not synonymous with appropriate but I admit I don't have the full grasp on how they're different. Maybe this has changed and is now more acceptable to use appropriate and apropos more interchangeably? Or it could be a regional thing?
They're very similar, but not exactly the same.
Apropos is to be appropriate to a situation. So it's appropriate to the situation that autocorrect put "Dick" into Dicey's name in my psycho ranting post.
But I wouldn't say the following: "it's not apropos to call Dicey a Dick for infecting me with an ear worm from hell because that's rude and she's my friend"
Do we have conclusive evidence that you didn't? I've never seen any, so I'm as yet unconvinced.
Also, I may be old to some of you young whippersnappers, but I wasn't gracing this earth in the early 1940's when it first became popular. What became popular in the forties? Why it's Mairzy Doats and...
Now get off my lawn! The goats are hungry!!! They haven't had this much of a workout in years.
I'm butting in here again with an even older one (1840's???) and some jam for the goats:
Caesar adsum iam forte, Brutus ad erat. Caesar sic in omnibus. Brutus in... I can't remember the last word, help me out here.
That's a sweet story about your dad. My Latin teacher was cool. She caught me with a boy in the stairwell once and didn't tell on me, after the assistant principal had threatened to expel me for something similar. She just took me aside and said "don't be frivolous". I worked harder in her class than any of the others after that, and even majored in Classics one of the times I went to college. I can't remember much real Latin now.
Semper ubi sub ubi.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on January 28, 2021, 03:53:37 AM
Mr Codd was speaking to Channel 9 this morning about a tragic incident in Brisbane, where a 17-year old allegedly stole a Toyota LandCruiser, ran a red light, collided with a truck, and fatally struck two pedestrians while walking their dog – all while allegedly under the influence of drugs.
That's a hell of a dog walk.
Post by: GreenSheep on January 28, 2021, 07:23:02 AM
It seems that people don't know that "lo" is a word... a word that has a meaning entirely different from "low." People who write "low" are announcing to the world that they don't read, or at least that there's minimal variety in their reading.
Post by: nereo on January 28, 2021, 08:08:35 AM
"low and behold"
It seems that people don't know that "lo" is a word... a word that has a meaning entirely different from "low."
All true, but... when is the last time you heard someone use the word "lo" who was not reciting a play or literature or scripture or saying "lo and behold"?
It's one of those words which is almost never used outside that specific expression.
Come to think of it, the entire expression "Lo and Behold!" doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Lo: an expression used to draw attention to something
Behold: To see or observe
Together it should be "hey, look at that!" but in practice it's used to express surprise or awe, often in a humorous way. Typically the speaker isn't asking the listener to observe ('behold') anything.
Post by: Dicey on January 29, 2021, 11:46:09 AM
"low and behold"I always think of cattle when I see that.
It seems that people don't know that "lo" is a word... a word that has a meaning entirely different from "low." People who write "low" are announcing to the world that they don't read, or at least that there's minimal variety in their reading.
Could it be they're mooing (lowing) to get your attention so they can show you something??"low and behold"Together it should be "hey, look at that!" but in practice it's used to express surprise or awe, often in a humorous way. Typically the speaker isn't asking the listener to observe ('behold') anything.
It seems that people don't know that "lo" is a word... a word that has a meaning entirely different from "low."
Post by: calimom on January 31, 2021, 10:40:21 AM
"low and behold"I always think of cattle when I see that.
It seems that people don't know that "lo" is a word... a word that has a meaning entirely different from "low." People who write "low" are announcing to the world that they don't read, or at least that there's minimal variety in their reading.Could it be they're mooing (lowing) to get your attention so they can show you something??"low and behold"Together it should be "hey, look at that!" but in practice it's used to express surprise or awe, often in a humorous way. Typically the speaker isn't asking the listener to observe ('behold') anything.
It seems that people don't know that "lo" is a word... a word that has a meaning entirely different from "low."
For all intense and purpose, yes!
Post by: GreenSheep on January 31, 2021, 10:53:17 AM
"low and behold"I always think of cattle when I see that.
It seems that people don't know that "lo" is a word... a word that has a meaning entirely different from "low." People who write "low" are announcing to the world that they don't read, or at least that there's minimal variety in their reading.Could it be they're mooing (lowing) to get your attention so they can show you something??"low and behold"Together it should be "hey, look at that!" but in practice it's used to express surprise or awe, often in a humorous way. Typically the speaker isn't asking the listener to observe ('behold') anything.
It seems that people don't know that "lo" is a word... a word that has a meaning entirely different from "low."
For all intense and purpose, yes!
No, no, it's "for all intensive purposes"!! /s
And yes, I will forever think of cows now when I read "low and behold." Haha!
Post by: Taran Wanderer on January 31, 2021, 01:00:41 PM
Post by: Chaplin on February 02, 2021, 10:16:16 PM
I think I'm also done with "humblebrag" and "flex" although I'm torn on "flex" - it does seem to be an efficient way of capturing some of the subtleties of dominant/alpha behavior.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on February 02, 2021, 10:21:24 PM
I've reached my limit with "So grateful to/for/because" followed by either a humblebrag or a flex.
I think I'm also done with "humblebrag" and "flex" although I'm torn on "flex" - it does seem to be an efficient way of capturing some of the subtleties of dominant/alpha behavior.
Yes yes yes yes yes...
Post by: Paul der Krake on February 02, 2021, 10:22:50 PM
I've reached my limit with "So grateful to/for/because" followed by either a humblebrag or a flex.The flip side of this: empty enthusiastic expressions for completely banal interactions.
I think I'm also done with "humblebrag" and "flex" although I'm torn on "flex" - it does seem to be an efficient way of capturing some of the subtleties of dominant/alpha behavior.
"Here is your coffee"
"Thank you sooo much, I really appreciate it"
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on February 02, 2021, 10:51:57 PM
I've reached my limit with "So grateful to/for/because" followed by either a humblebrag or a flex.
I think I'm also done with "humblebrag" and "flex" although I'm torn on "flex" - it does seem to be an efficient way of capturing some of the subtleties of dominant/alpha behavior.
I think LinkedIn should be illegal. It's probably the worst thing to have come out of America. Worse than Donald Trump.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on February 02, 2021, 11:25:43 PM
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on February 03, 2021, 01:08:24 AM
Post by: GreenSheep on February 03, 2021, 08:12:43 AM
I've reached my limit with "So grateful to/for/because" followed by either a humblebrag or a flex.
I think I'm also done with "humblebrag" and "flex" although I'm torn on "flex" - it does seem to be an efficient way of capturing some of the subtleties of dominant/alpha behavior.
I was just wondering yesterday if I had become a grumpy old person because it seems like every time someone being interviewed on a podcast is asked to give the listeners advice, they recommend "gratitude." I was finding myself annoyed by it, which is kind of like being annoyed by rainbows and puppies and unicorns... but this is why. (This and it's the same tired old advice everyone trots out when they can't think of anything else.) Thank you for clearing that up!
The flip side of this: empty enthusiastic expressions for completely banal interactions.
"Here is your coffee"
"Thank you sooo much, I really appreciate it"
I wonder if this is because no one can see smiles anymore, so people feel like they have to "smile" with their words.
Post by: Kris on February 03, 2021, 08:54:46 AM
The flip side of this: empty enthusiastic expressions for completely banal interactions.
"Here is your coffee"
"Thank you sooo much, I really appreciate it"
I wonder if this is because no one can see smiles anymore, so people feel like they have to "smile" with their words.
I have a friend who does this, and has done since before the pandemic. He is so overly enthusiastic about everything that I feel like I have no idea what his actual opinions are. It's way, way too over the top. The end result is that I barely trust him because it feels like he's being fake all the time.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on February 03, 2021, 12:21:04 PM
Heh, there's a sales guy at our company who is simply over the top about everything. He's a great guy, and fantastic at his job, but totally intense about everything, from the product we sell to the food he eats to the way he ties his shoes*. He is the epitome of a gregarious salesman. Me? I'm an engineer, and pretty low key, and his demeanor feels like sandpaper on my eardrums.**The flip side of this: empty enthusiastic expressions for completely banal interactions.
"Here is your coffee"
"Thank you sooo much, I really appreciate it"
I wonder if this is because no one can see smiles anymore, so people feel like they have to "smile" with their words.
I have a friend who does this, and has done since before the pandemic. He is so overly enthusiastic about everything that I feel like I have no idea what his actual opinions are. It's way, way too over the top. The end result is that I barely trust him because it feels like he's being fake all the time.
*ok, might be exaggerating on that last part. A bit.
** I fully acknowledge that this is a failing in my character, not his, and I don't hold it against him. I find it fascinating that I have such a visceral reaction to his comportment.
Post by: Kris on February 03, 2021, 12:30:55 PM
Heh, there's a sales guy at our company who is simply over the top about everything. He's a great guy, and fantastic at his job, but totally intense about everything, from the product we sell to the food he eats to the way he ties his shoes*. He is the epitome of a gregarious salesman. Me? I'm an engineer, and pretty low key, and his demeanor feels like sandpaper on my eardrums.**The flip side of this: empty enthusiastic expressions for completely banal interactions.
"Here is your coffee"
"Thank you sooo much, I really appreciate it"
I wonder if this is because no one can see smiles anymore, so people feel like they have to "smile" with their words.
I have a friend who does this, and has done since before the pandemic. He is so overly enthusiastic about everything that I feel like I have no idea what his actual opinions are. It's way, way too over the top. The end result is that I barely trust him because it feels like he's being fake all the time.
*ok, might be exaggerating on that last part. A bit.
** I fully acknowledge that this is a failing in my character, not his, and I don't hold it against him. I find it fascinating that I have such a visceral reaction to his comportment.
My friend recently posted on social media that he is trying to say “I love you” more to friends. His reason for this was that he saw a meme saying that one should say it so much that it’s weird.
I cannot tell you how much I do not want him to start doing this to me.
Post by: Metalcat on February 03, 2021, 12:53:13 PM
Heh, there's a sales guy at our company who is simply over the top about everything. He's a great guy, and fantastic at his job, but totally intense about everything, from the product we sell to the food he eats to the way he ties his shoes*. He is the epitome of a gregarious salesman. Me? I'm an engineer, and pretty low key, and his demeanor feels like sandpaper on my eardrums.**The flip side of this: empty enthusiastic expressions for completely banal interactions.
"Here is your coffee"
"Thank you sooo much, I really appreciate it"
I wonder if this is because no one can see smiles anymore, so people feel like they have to "smile" with their words.
I have a friend who does this, and has done since before the pandemic. He is so overly enthusiastic about everything that I feel like I have no idea what his actual opinions are. It's way, way too over the top. The end result is that I barely trust him because it feels like he's being fake all the time.
*ok, might be exaggerating on that last part. A bit.
** I fully acknowledge that this is a failing in my character, not his, and I don't hold it against him. I find it fascinating that I have such a visceral reaction to his comportment.
Lol, I drive people fucking batty with my relentless positivity.
My patients used to complain about it all the time and I would cheerfully reply with a huge grin and a sing-along tone: "suck it up princess, you're in my house now"
So yeah, picture a sort of aggro Mary Poppins.
Post by: Paul der Krake on February 03, 2021, 01:11:49 PM
Down with sentiment inflation.
Post by: nereo on February 03, 2021, 02:29:20 PM
I’ve noticed that the USA is one country where people are uncomfortable with unsolicited kindness and friendliness from anyone who is not a very close friend.Heh, there's a sales guy at our company who is simply over the top about everything. He's a great guy, and fantastic at his job, but totally intense about everything, from the product we sell to the food he eats to the way he ties his shoes*. He is the epitome of a gregarious salesman. Me? I'm an engineer, and pretty low key, and his demeanor feels like sandpaper on my eardrums.**The flip side of this: empty enthusiastic expressions for completely banal interactions.
"Here is your coffee"
"Thank you sooo much, I really appreciate it"
I wonder if this is because no one can see smiles anymore, so people feel like they have to "smile" with their words.
I have a friend who does this, and has done since before the pandemic. He is so overly enthusiastic about everything that I feel like I have no idea what his actual opinions are. It's way, way too over the top. The end result is that I barely trust him because it feels like he's being fake all the time.
*ok, might be exaggerating on that last part. A bit.
** I fully acknowledge that this is a failing in my character, not his, and I don't hold it against him. I find it fascinating that I have such a visceral reaction to his comportment.
Lol, I drive people fucking batty with my relentless positivity.
My patients used to complain about it all the time and I would cheerfully reply with a huge grin and a sing-along tone: "suck it up princess, you're in my house now"
So yeah, picture a sort of aggro Mary Poppins.
Some other places I’ve been it’s much more common to hug near-strangers and share with them what we would consider pretty intimate details of our daily lives.
I blame our Puritan founders
Post by: Metalcat on February 03, 2021, 05:04:02 PM
I’ve noticed that the USA is one country where people are uncomfortable with unsolicited kindness and friendliness from anyone who is not a very close friend.Heh, there's a sales guy at our company who is simply over the top about everything. He's a great guy, and fantastic at his job, but totally intense about everything, from the product we sell to the food he eats to the way he ties his shoes*. He is the epitome of a gregarious salesman. Me? I'm an engineer, and pretty low key, and his demeanor feels like sandpaper on my eardrums.**The flip side of this: empty enthusiastic expressions for completely banal interactions.
"Here is your coffee"
"Thank you sooo much, I really appreciate it"
I wonder if this is because no one can see smiles anymore, so people feel like they have to "smile" with their words.
I have a friend who does this, and has done since before the pandemic. He is so overly enthusiastic about everything that I feel like I have no idea what his actual opinions are. It's way, way too over the top. The end result is that I barely trust him because it feels like he's being fake all the time.
*ok, might be exaggerating on that last part. A bit.
** I fully acknowledge that this is a failing in my character, not his, and I don't hold it against him. I find it fascinating that I have such a visceral reaction to his comportment.
Lol, I drive people fucking batty with my relentless positivity.
My patients used to complain about it all the time and I would cheerfully reply with a huge grin and a sing-along tone: "suck it up princess, you're in my house now"
So yeah, picture a sort of aggro Mary Poppins.
Some other places I’ve been it’s much more common to hug near-strangers and share with them what we would consider pretty intimate details of our daily lives.
I blame our Puritan founders
Really? Every time I go to the US, I'm always like "holy crap these people are intense with the friendliness". Like, I'm used to being unusually warm and open, I'm not used to people matching that energy.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on February 03, 2021, 05:24:18 PM
I'm pushing within my work sphere for people to be more open (including publicly, on LinkedIn) about failures, worries and disappointments. This cultural change can only be effected by people like me/us on these forums - i.e. senior workers who have no financial worries and whose word carries some clout. Obviously a junior employee can't go around saying how useless he or she is. So hopefully, in time, I'd like to see work culture focus more on realism rather than optimism/self-promotion.
Post by: Metalcat on February 04, 2021, 05:16:32 AM
I find Americans to be friendly and sincere but they hate to admit weakness or difficulty. Hence "LinkedIn culture" - everyone is constantly blessed and grateful for their amazing lives, and is promoting an image of same.
I'm pushing within my work sphere for people to be more open (including publicly, on LinkedIn) about failures, worries and disappointments. This cultural change can only be effected by people like me/us on these forums - i.e. senior workers who have no financial worries and whose word carries some clout. Obviously a junior employee can't go around saying how useless he or she is. So hopefully, in time, I'd like to see work culture focus more on realism rather than optimism/self-promotion.
I too was very big on promoting open discussion about failures and insecurities among my staff, and was very open myself about it. I just did it in a warm, positive, and supportive way where I normalized failure as part of the process.
I guess I'm just not familiar with this concept of optimism and positivity being equated with self promotion?
But I also don't have any of this humblebrag "grateful" shit on my LinkedIn either.
Post by: Dicey on February 04, 2021, 06:46:15 AM
Post by: Roadrunner53 on February 04, 2021, 07:39:55 AM
Post by: jinga nation on February 04, 2021, 07:40:47 AM
Oh, come on now. Facebook is way, way worse than LinkedIn. I find LinkedIn reasonably useful, but I don’t go on it much. What drives me most nuts about LinkedIn is when people start posting stuff that really should be on Facebook. Or worse yet, stuff that really shouldn’t even be on Facebook or even spoken out loud or perhaps not even thought about except to dismiss it as irrational BS.
Aye! I have my LinkedIn curated to not show political/social media/feelgood type posts. If someone does post something annoying or offensive, easy to flag as "don't show my such posts from this person".
Also, I don't put too much info on my profile. simple dates and employers (not what I did at each workplace) and my industry certs. And I don't accept requests from people I don't know personally.
There's a lot of industry-related posts on my LinkedIn feed by knowledgeable folks in that sub-field/specialty.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on February 04, 2021, 07:55:48 AM
I find Americans to be friendly and sincere but they hate to admit weakness or difficulty. Hence "LinkedIn culture" - everyone is constantly blessed and grateful for their amazing lives, and is promoting an image of same.
I'm pushing within my work sphere for people to be more open (including publicly, on LinkedIn) about failures, worries and disappointments. This cultural change can only be effected by people like me/us on these forums - i.e. senior workers who have no financial worries and whose word carries some clout. Obviously a junior employee can't go around saying how useless he or she is. So hopefully, in time, I'd like to see work culture focus more on realism rather than optimism/self-promotion.
I too was very big on promoting open discussion about failures and insecurities among my staff, and was very open myself about it. I just did it in a warm, positive, and supportive way where I normalized failure as part of the process.
I guess I'm just not familiar with this concept of optimism and positivity being equated with self promotion?
But I also don't have any of this humblebrag "grateful" shit on my LinkedIn either.
Optimism is fine, but self-aggrandising positivity shits me.
Unfortunately, because I'm in the legal industry, I have to deal with lawyers posting stories about their amazing triumphs, etc, boring, etc.
Unless your case set a precedent or something, it's not necessary to share - I guess I don't really have an issue with you posting about your wins as long as you also post about the losses. It just irks me because it's really unnecessary and I think self-congratulatory posts are unprofessional.
I'm fine with posts congratulating others, particularly those who are your rivals or competitors - I think that's classy.
Post by: Metalcat on February 04, 2021, 08:03:49 AM
I find Americans to be friendly and sincere but they hate to admit weakness or difficulty. Hence "LinkedIn culture" - everyone is constantly blessed and grateful for their amazing lives, and is promoting an image of same.
I'm pushing within my work sphere for people to be more open (including publicly, on LinkedIn) about failures, worries and disappointments. This cultural change can only be effected by people like me/us on these forums - i.e. senior workers who have no financial worries and whose word carries some clout. Obviously a junior employee can't go around saying how useless he or she is. So hopefully, in time, I'd like to see work culture focus more on realism rather than optimism/self-promotion.
I too was very big on promoting open discussion about failures and insecurities among my staff, and was very open myself about it. I just did it in a warm, positive, and supportive way where I normalized failure as part of the process.
I guess I'm just not familiar with this concept of optimism and positivity being equated with self promotion?
But I also don't have any of this humblebrag "grateful" shit on my LinkedIn either.
Optimism is fine, but self-aggrandising positivity shits me.
Unfortunately, because I'm in the legal industry, I have to deal with lawyers posting stories about their amazing triumphs, etc, boring, etc.
Unless your case set a precedent or something, it's not necessary to share - I guess I don't really have an issue with you posting about your wins as long as you also post about the losses. It just irks me because it's really unnecessary and I think self-congratulatory posts are unprofessional.
I'm fine with posts congratulating others, particularly those who are your rivals or competitors - I think that's classy.
Ahh, clearly I somehow exist in a reality where I never see this crap, so I'm not familiar with it. I exist in a world where my colleagues are largely quite open about their struggles and are more likely to complain about their rampant imposter syndrome than humble brag about anything because everyone feels inferior.
Post by: nereo on February 04, 2021, 10:42:06 AM
Related: I am sick of hearing how "deserving" people are. I watch a bit of HGTV (it's my go-to mindless entertainment). and it's starting to become pervasive there, and elsewhere. Drives me nuts.
I find HGTV difficult to watch precisely because they spend so much time on personal backstories any why each person "deserves" the makeover/renovation/life-coaching they are getting.
Reminds me of a poster my HS history teach had on his wall: "Always remember you are unique, just like everyone else"
Post by: SunnyDays on February 04, 2021, 10:50:12 AM
I find Americans to be friendly and sincere but they hate to admit weakness or difficulty. Hence "LinkedIn culture" - everyone is constantly blessed and grateful for their amazing lives, and is promoting an image of same.
I'm pushing within my work sphere for people to be more open (including publicly, on LinkedIn) about failures, worries and disappointments. This cultural change can only be effected by people like me/us on these forums - i.e. senior workers who have no financial worries and whose word carries some clout. Obviously a junior employee can't go around saying how useless he or she is. So hopefully, in time, I'd like to see work culture focus more on realism rather than optimism/self-promotion.
I too was very big on promoting open discussion about failures and insecurities among my staff, and was very open myself about it. I just did it in a warm, positive, and supportive way where I normalized failure as part of the process.
I guess I'm just not familiar with this concept of optimism and positivity being equated with self promotion?
But I also don't have any of this humblebrag "grateful" shit on my LinkedIn either.
Optimism is fine, but self-aggrandising positivity shits me.
Unfortunately, because I'm in the legal industry, I have to deal with lawyers posting stories about their amazing triumphs, etc, boring, etc.
Unless your case set a precedent or something, it's not necessary to share - I guess I don't really have an issue with you posting about your wins as long as you also post about the losses. It just irks me because it's really unnecessary and I think self-congratulatory posts are unprofessional.
I'm fine with posts congratulating others, particularly those who are your rivals or competitors - I think that's classy.
Ahh, clearly I somehow exist in a reality where I never see this crap, so I'm not familiar with it. I exist in a world where my colleagues are largely quite open about their struggles and are more likely to complain about their rampant imposter syndrome than humble brag about anything because everyone feels inferior.
Yup, my world when I was working was just like yours. I wonder if it's a difference between social services (it sounds like that's what you're in) versus money-earning businesses? Those of us in SS see and deal with all the crap that happens in people's lives, which brings you down to earth pretty quickly. But when you're trying to bring in business, you have to project an image of success in every way you possibly can.
Post by: Metalcat on February 04, 2021, 11:01:45 AM
I find Americans to be friendly and sincere but they hate to admit weakness or difficulty. Hence "LinkedIn culture" - everyone is constantly blessed and grateful for their amazing lives, and is promoting an image of same.
I'm pushing within my work sphere for people to be more open (including publicly, on LinkedIn) about failures, worries and disappointments. This cultural change can only be effected by people like me/us on these forums - i.e. senior workers who have no financial worries and whose word carries some clout. Obviously a junior employee can't go around saying how useless he or she is. So hopefully, in time, I'd like to see work culture focus more on realism rather than optimism/self-promotion.
I too was very big on promoting open discussion about failures and insecurities among my staff, and was very open myself about it. I just did it in a warm, positive, and supportive way where I normalized failure as part of the process.
I guess I'm just not familiar with this concept of optimism and positivity being equated with self promotion?
But I also don't have any of this humblebrag "grateful" shit on my LinkedIn either.
Optimism is fine, but self-aggrandising positivity shits me.
Unfortunately, because I'm in the legal industry, I have to deal with lawyers posting stories about their amazing triumphs, etc, boring, etc.
Unless your case set a precedent or something, it's not necessary to share - I guess I don't really have an issue with you posting about your wins as long as you also post about the losses. It just irks me because it's really unnecessary and I think self-congratulatory posts are unprofessional.
I'm fine with posts congratulating others, particularly those who are your rivals or competitors - I think that's classy.
Ahh, clearly I somehow exist in a reality where I never see this crap, so I'm not familiar with it. I exist in a world where my colleagues are largely quite open about their struggles and are more likely to complain about their rampant imposter syndrome than humble brag about anything because everyone feels inferior.
Yup, my world when I was working was just like yours. I wonder if it's a difference between social services (it sounds like that's what you're in) versus money-earning businesses? Those of us in SS see and deal with all the crap that happens in people's lives, which brings you down to earth pretty quickly. But when you're trying to bring in business, you have to project an image of success in every way you possibly can.
N'ah, I'm in a highly profitable private medical industry. However, my industry is majority female, which I think makes a big difference.
Post by: Dicey on February 04, 2021, 12:53:51 PM
OMG, that literally made me laugh out loud! Thanks, nereo.Related: I am sick of hearing how "deserving" people are. I watch a bit of HGTV (it's my go-to mindless entertainment). and it's starting to become pervasive there, and elsewhere. Drives me nuts.
I find HGTV difficult to watch precisely because they spend so much time on personal backstories any why each person "deserves" the makeover/renovation/life-coaching they are getting.
Reminds me of a poster my HS history teach had on his wall: "Always remember you are unique, just like everyone else"
Post by: SunnyDays on February 04, 2021, 02:39:24 PM
Post by: Taran Wanderer on February 04, 2021, 02:46:52 PM
Post by: SunnyDays on February 04, 2021, 03:12:17 PM
New one: I seen that rather than I saw that or I have seen that. Drives me bonkers.
Yeah, I hear “I seen” quite a bit. From a former boss, no less. Couldn’t bring myself to correct him.
Also, typing “quiet” as “quite.”
Both things make me think the person has a low education level, but my boss had a university degree.
Post by: GreenSheep on February 04, 2021, 04:35:06 PM
OMG, that literally made me laugh out loud! Thanks, nereo.Related: I am sick of hearing how "deserving" people are. I watch a bit of HGTV (it's my go-to mindless entertainment). and it's starting to become pervasive there, and elsewhere. Drives me nuts.
I find HGTV difficult to watch precisely because they spend so much time on personal backstories any why each person "deserves" the makeover/renovation/life-coaching they are getting.
Reminds me of a poster my HS history teach had on his wall: "Always remember you are unique, just like everyone else"
That reminds me of this company that makes snarky "demotivational" posters (and mugs, notepads, etc.) that make fun of motivational posters:
https://despair.com/collections/demotivators
(I have no financial ties with them. Just been enjoying their stuff for 20+ years.)
Post by: Morning Glory on February 04, 2021, 04:37:47 PM
Related: I am sick of hearing how "deserving" people are. I watch a bit of HGTV (it's my go-to mindless entertainment). and it's starting to become pervasive there, and elsewhere. Drives me nuts.
I find HGTV difficult to watch precisely because they spend so much time on personal backstories any why each person "deserves" the makeover/renovation/life-coaching they are getting.
Reminds me of a poster my HS history teach had on his wall: "Always remember you are unique, just like everyone else"
I used to have a tee shirt with that saying on it.
Post by: GreenSheep on February 04, 2021, 04:38:09 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 04, 2021, 05:34:04 PM
New one: I seen that rather than I saw that or I have seen that. Drives me bonkers.
Yeah, I hear “I seen” quite a bit. From a former boss, no less. Couldn’t bring myself to correct him.
Also, typing “quiet” as “quite.”
Both things make me think the person has a low education level, but my boss had a university degree.
Quite is a typo for quiet. I transpose letters often and just hope I catch all my typos when I proofread. It's worse on my tablet and phone.
Post by: Morning Glory on February 04, 2021, 06:06:38 PM
Post by: Metalcat on February 04, 2021, 06:09:22 PM
Today a student used "comfortability" to mean "level of comfort"
Lol, I actually like that one
Post by: SunnyDays on February 04, 2021, 06:46:57 PM
New one: I seen that rather than I saw that or I have seen that. Drives me bonkers.
Yeah, I hear “I seen” quite a bit. From a former boss, no less. Couldn’t bring myself to correct him.
Also, typing “quiet” as “quite.”
Both things make me think the person has a low education level, but my boss had a university degree.
Quite is a typo for quiet. I transpose letters often and just hope I catch all my typos when I proofread. It's worse on my tablet and phone.
Sometimes, maybe, but I see it so often, I think a lot of people just can’t spell it.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 04, 2021, 08:01:09 PM
New one: I seen that rather than I saw that or I have seen that. Drives me bonkers.
Yeah, I hear “I seen” quite a bit. From a former boss, no less. Couldn’t bring myself to correct him.
Also, typing “quiet” as “quite.”
Both things make me think the person has a low education level, but my boss had a university degree.
Quite is a typo for quiet. I transpose letters often and just hope I catch all my typos when I proofread. It's worse on my tablet and phone.
Sometimes, maybe, but I see it so often, I think a lot of people just can’t spell it.
Or have seen the typo so often it no longer registers.
When spell check first came out there was a poem floating around in which every word was a correct spelling, but most of them were the wrong words. I wonder if it is still around . . .
Thanks Google, Ode to a spelling checker. It starts:
Eye halve a spelling check her, it came with my pea sea
Post by: nereo on February 05, 2021, 04:35:47 AM
Post by: DadJokes on February 05, 2021, 06:04:46 AM
Content-based spell-check still has a ways to go...
Grammarly is amazing. I'm what people might call a "grammar Nazi" (there's another phrase that should probably go away), and it catches a lot of things that I miss.
Post by: Chaplin on February 05, 2021, 11:58:43 AM
Content-based spell-check still has a ways to go...
Grammarly is amazing. I'm what people might call a "grammar Nazi" (there's another phrase that should probably go away), and it catches a lot of things that I miss.
What, afraid of offending nazis? But yes, I agree it should probably go away even though it captures that aspect of some people (like me) so succinctly.
Post by: DadJokes on February 05, 2021, 01:01:48 PM
Content-based spell-check still has a ways to go...
Grammarly is amazing. I'm what people might call a "grammar Nazi" (there's another phrase that should probably go away), and it catches a lot of things that I miss.
What, afraid of offending nazis? But yes, I agree it should probably go away even though it captures that aspect of some people (like me) so succinctly.
It's not a fear of offending nazis - it's frustration at applying a negative stereotype to people for having the gall to expect others to use correct spelling and punctuation.
Post by: Metalcat on February 05, 2021, 01:04:07 PM
Content-based spell-check still has a ways to go...
Grammarly is amazing. I'm what people might call a "grammar Nazi" (there's another phrase that should probably go away), and it catches a lot of things that I miss.
What, afraid of offending nazis? But yes, I agree it should probably go away even though it captures that aspect of some people (like me) so succinctly.
It's not a fear of offending nazis - it's frustration at applying a negative stereotype to people for having the gall to expect others to use correct spelling and punctuation.
And here I thought the issue was trivializing the horrors of Nazism...
Post by: nereo on February 05, 2021, 02:49:23 PM
Post by: Chaplin on February 05, 2021, 05:30:55 PM
Content-based spell-check still has a ways to go...
Grammarly is amazing. I'm what people might call a "grammar Nazi" (there's another phrase that should probably go away), and it catches a lot of things that I miss.
What, afraid of offending nazis? But yes, I agree it should probably go away even though it captures that aspect of some people (like me) so succinctly.
It's not a fear of offending nazis - it's frustration at applying a negative stereotype to people for having the gall to expect others to use correct spelling and punctuation.
And here I thought the issue was trivializing the horrors of Nazism...
Yes, this is why I'm in favor of retiring the phrase. Regardless of intention, on this topic humor is too close to trivializing. I also agree with DadJokes that making it a negative to write well or be educated is saddening.
Post by: Dollar Slice on February 05, 2021, 05:48:11 PM
FWIW, about half of my family was killed by the Nazis. So... ‘grammar nazi’... not the same thing.
Like you, several of my family members in my grandparents' generation were killed in the gas chambers by the Nazis. But my generation of the family has fought bloody wars in the grammar trenches, proofreading and copy editing for nearly twenty years in print and digital publishing, and I can assure you that it's more or less the same thing. /s
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 06, 2021, 07:06:10 AM
I nominate "grammar advocate" for the new term. "Grammar appreciator" might also work.
Post by: Dee on February 07, 2021, 10:02:23 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 08, 2021, 07:37:11 AM
I saw someone elsewhere complaining about people not differentiating between "lightening" as in lightening the load, and "lightning" the bright flashes that accompany thunder.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 09, 2021, 08:34:46 AM
Post by: SunnyDays on February 09, 2021, 10:09:18 AM
Post by: nereo on February 09, 2021, 10:43:09 AM
Just saw one in the comments section of an article in the Vancouver Sun. I guess they don't proofread comments. The phrase was "illicit pity" and the meaning of the sentence was "elicit pity". I suppose illicit pity may be a thing, but not for that situation.
Illicit Pity: What supporters of Alexei Navalny express during demonstrations.
Post by: GreenSheep on February 09, 2021, 12:19:39 PM
So many people say "try and ....." rather than "try to ....." And is a conjunction, not a preposition. I see this all the time in print also by writers! Who should know better. Grrrr.
Yes! I hate this one! And yet... so many people use it that I'm afraid it's becoming an accepted "shift" in our language. I don't mind shifts in language that come from new slang or from added convenience, but when a shift simply comes from ignorance, it drives me nuts. Most Americans know only one language. You'd think we could at least get that one right.
"Try and" always makes me think of two completely separate concepts. "We're going to try (try what? who knows!) and we're going to have that report on your desk by Friday."
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 09, 2021, 01:01:47 PM
So many people say "try and ....." rather than "try to ....." And is a conjunction, not a preposition. I see this all the time in print also by writers! Who should know better. Grrrr.
Yes! I hate this one! And yet... so many people use it that I'm afraid it's becoming an accepted "shift" in our language. I don't mind shifts in language that come from new slang or from added convenience, but when a shift simply comes from ignorance, it drives me nuts. Most Americans know only one language. You'd think we could at least get that one right.
"Try and" always makes me think of two completely separate concepts. "We're going to try (try what? who knows!) and we're going to have that report on your desk by Friday."
"Try and" just slides off the tongue. "Try to" requires enunciation of a "t" twice. That takes a lot of effort. /s.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on February 09, 2021, 05:12:51 PM
So many people say "try and ....." rather than "try to ....." And is a conjunction, not a preposition. I see this all the time in print also by writers! Who should know better. Grrrr.
This annoys me too, as does the general misuse of prepositions / doubling up of prepositions ("The hole in which we fell into.")
I also prefer prepositions to not end sentences with.
I also feel that people aren't very good at using prepositional phrases generally - they're such wonderful things, and easily stacked and nested as long as you have a good sense of cadence - and the mechanics of prepositions are not taught well enough.
I also get annoyed by people who try to make the verb agree with the object of a preposition rather than the subject of the sentence.
Yes - I am a grammar Na-, er, stickler
Post by: Chaplin on February 09, 2021, 07:03:33 PM
Quote
"Never end a sentence on a preposition." When criticized for occasionally ending a sentence on a preposition, Winston Churchill replied, "This is the type of errant pedantry up with which I will not put." Churchill's reply satirizes the strict adherence to this rule.
Funny regardless of whether you agree or not.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 09, 2021, 07:04:19 PM
Yes - I am a grammar Na-, er, stickler
Don't lawyers have to be careful with words? I'm assuming you have read and appreciated Eats, shoots and leaves.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on February 10, 2021, 04:41:16 AM
Not just careful with words, careful with commas, too! (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/us/oxford-comma-maine.html)
Yes - I am a grammar Na-, er, stickler
Don't lawyers have to be careful with words? I'm assuming you have read and appreciated Eats, shoots and leaves.
Post by: Dicey on February 11, 2021, 03:15:34 AM
Wow, what a story!Not just careful with words, careful with commas, too! (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/us/oxford-comma-maine.html)
Yes - I am a grammar Na-, er, stickler
Don't lawyers have to be careful with words? I'm assuming you have read and appreciated Eats, shoots and leaves.
Post by: DadJokes on February 11, 2021, 07:37:51 AM
Not just careful with words, careful with commas, too! (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/us/oxford-comma-maine.html)
Yes - I am a grammar Na-, er, stickler
Don't lawyers have to be careful with words? I'm assuming you have read and appreciated Eats, shoots and leaves.
There are two types of people in the world: people who use the Oxford comma and people who are wrong.
Post by: sui generis on February 11, 2021, 08:00:50 AM
Not just careful with words, careful with commas, too! (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/us/oxford-comma-maine.html)
Yes - I am a grammar Na-, er, stickler
Don't lawyers have to be careful with words? I'm assuming you have read and appreciated Eats, shoots and leaves.
It's interesting that the article (and presumably the case) hinged only on the comma. Whereas if the gerund had been used (distributing rather than distribution) consistent with the rest of the paragraph, it would also have been a lot clearer as well as correct. While there may be disputes about the essentialism of the Oxford comma, no one disputes that proper grammar requires use of the same tense throughout a series. Indeed the revision to the law included that change.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on February 11, 2021, 08:25:44 AM
Post by: dignam on February 11, 2021, 08:39:52 AM
Post by: sui generis on February 11, 2021, 08:40:35 AM
I don't often use the Oxford comma, as I find it clunky. If a list really requires the Oxford comma for clarity, I'll be tempted to rearrange the items or to bring out the big gun, the semicolon. I try to avoid commas where possible. Two simple clauses I will join with a bare conjunction - no comma. And generally I find dashes and semicolons and parentheses often work better than a comma. Just a stylistic choice obviously.
That's the other change the made in the law in the linked article, after the dispute was resolved.
Post by: solon on February 11, 2021, 08:59:47 AM
I don't often use the Oxford comma, as I find it clunky. If a list really requires the Oxford comma for clarity, I'll be tempted to rearrange the items or to bring out the big gun, the semicolon. I try to avoid commas where possible. Two simple clauses I will join with a bare conjunction - no comma. And generally I find dashes and semicolons and parentheses often work better than a comma. Just a stylistic choice obviously.
Doesn't like commas. Uses 3 commas to explain why.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 11, 2021, 12:05:15 PM
I don't often use the Oxford comma, as I find it clunky. If a list really requires the Oxford comma for clarity, I'll be tempted to rearrange the items or to bring out the big gun, the semicolon. I try to avoid commas where possible. Two simple clauses I will join with a bare conjunction - no comma. And generally I find dashes and semicolons and parentheses often work better than a comma. Just a stylistic choice obviously.
Doesn't like commas. Uses 3 commas to explain why.
I like the Oxford comma, but then I am a dinosaur (not really). Dashes are great in casual writing but I doubt they are acceptable in legal issues and legislation.
We don't learn it in English class, but I have seen there are lists of which adjectives should be used before/after others. I can see the point. Is the woman in Santana's song a black woman who practices magic, or a woman who practices black magic? After all she is a black magic woman.
Post by: GuitarStv on February 11, 2021, 12:56:47 PM
I don't often use the Oxford comma, as I find it clunky. If a list really requires the Oxford comma for clarity, I'll be tempted to rearrange the items or to bring out the big gun, the semicolon. I try to avoid commas where possible. Two simple clauses I will join with a bare conjunction - no comma. And generally I find dashes and semicolons and parentheses often work better than a comma. Just a stylistic choice obviously.
Doesn't like commas. Uses 3 commas to explain why.
Cut him some slack . . . he may just be deep into a new bottle
(https://www.totalwine.com/dynamic/x490,sq/media/sys_master/twmmedia/h73/hd9/12357556600862.png)
Post by: Freedomin5 on February 11, 2021, 02:19:20 PM
I don't often use the Oxford comma, as I find it clunky. If a list really requires the Oxford comma for clarity, I'll be tempted to rearrange the items or to bring out the big gun, the semicolon. I try to avoid commas where possible. Two simple clauses I will join with a bare conjunction - no comma. And generally I find dashes and semicolons and parentheses often work better than a comma. Just a stylistic choice obviously.
Doesn't like commas. Uses 3 commas to explain why.
Bloop Bloop doesn’t like the Oxford comma. They didn’t use a single Oxford comma in their explanation. Bloop Bloop never said they didn’t like commas in general.
Post by: Metalcat on February 11, 2021, 02:20:32 PM
I don't often use the Oxford comma, as I find it clunky. If a list really requires the Oxford comma for clarity, I'll be tempted to rearrange the items or to bring out the big gun, the semicolon. I try to avoid commas where possible. Two simple clauses I will join with a bare conjunction - no comma. And generally I find dashes and semicolons and parentheses often work better than a comma. Just a stylistic choice obviously.
Doesn't like commas. Uses 3 commas to explain why.
Bloop Bloop doesn’t like the Oxford comma. They didn’t use a single Oxford comma in their explanation. Bloop Bloop never said they didn’t like commas in general.
That's what I first thought, but Bloop did say in the above quote "I try to avoid using commas where possible"
Post by: Freedomin5 on February 11, 2021, 02:42:40 PM
I don't often use the Oxford comma, as I find it clunky. If a list really requires the Oxford comma for clarity, I'll be tempted to rearrange the items or to bring out the big gun, the semicolon. I try to avoid commas where possible. Two simple clauses I will join with a bare conjunction - no comma. And generally I find dashes and semicolons and parentheses often work better than a comma. Just a stylistic choice obviously.
Doesn't like commas. Uses 3 commas to explain why.
Bloop Bloop doesn’t like the Oxford comma. They didn’t use a single Oxford comma in their explanation. Bloop Bloop never said they didn’t like commas in general.
That's what I first thought, but Bloop did say in the above quote "I try to avoid using commas where possible"
My bad. I thought the whole paragraph was about the Oxford comma.
Post by: LaineyAZ on February 11, 2021, 08:37:39 PM
Paddy = Patrick; Patty = Patricia.
Post by: BlueHouse on February 15, 2021, 07:54:10 AM
Reminds me of a poster my HS history teach had on his wall: "Always remember you are unique, just like everyone else"
I consult on and teach project management techniques. I often hear how what is required is not possible because this person's project is unique. It's literally in PMI definition that it is unique. I always say "yes, you're unique. You're all unique" I usually don't hear the chuckles until I finish with "everybody's special"
Post by: Kris on February 15, 2021, 09:39:45 AM
Good God in Heaven. It’s “a lot.”
Post by: GreenSheep on February 15, 2021, 10:33:43 AM
Post by: Metalcat on February 15, 2021, 10:37:34 AM
“Alot”
Good God in Heaven. It’s “a lot.”
I thought Hyperbole and A Half taught us all to adore the lovable Alot.
Post by: Chaplin on February 15, 2021, 10:39:21 AM
Adding to the "unique" headaches... something/someone cannot be "very unique" or "pretty unique" or "totally unique." Something is either unique or it isn't. It's not a qualify-able adjective.
That’s just, like, your opinion, man. But, yes that bugs me too.
Almost or nearly unique seems legitimate though as a way of expressing rareness.
Post by: GreenSheep on February 15, 2021, 11:08:06 AM
Adding to the "unique" headaches... something/someone cannot be "very unique" or "pretty unique" or "totally unique." Something is either unique or it isn't. It's not a qualify-able adjective.
That’s just, like, your opinion, man. But, yes that bugs me too.
Almost or nearly unique seems legitimate though as a way of expressing rareness.
Oh, you have a good point! I'm not sure I've ever heard/seen anyone use it that way, but I do think it's valid. I guess you can be "just slightly less than unique" but you can't make the word "unique" even stronger by adding a qualifier.
Post by: Dicey on February 16, 2021, 05:36:32 AM
“Alot”I just noticed this on another thread today. Eeps! Please remove the fingernails from the chalkboard!
Good God in Heaven. It’s “a lot.”
Post by: chaskavitch on February 16, 2021, 06:33:35 AM
“Alot”I just noticed this on another thread today. Eeps! Please remove the fingernails from the chalkboard!
Good God in Heaven. It’s “a lot.”
But just think, you can post a picture of the Alot every time to straighten people out!
Post by: Metalcat on February 16, 2021, 07:10:55 AM
“Alot”I just noticed this on another thread today. Eeps! Please remove the fingernails from the chalkboard!
Good God in Heaven. It’s “a lot.”
But just think, you can post a picture of the Alot every time to straighten people out!
^exactly!
That's what I was saying above, that comic totally worked on me, I smile now every time I see the typo "alot".
Post by: SunnyDays on February 16, 2021, 09:22:11 AM
Post by: LaineyAZ on February 18, 2021, 07:46:09 AM
I hate redundancy. Especially "exactly the same" or "the same exact thing." It just bugs me.
Someone pointed out that you don't have to say "hot water heater" - it's just "water heater." Hadn't thought about that one.
Post by: SunnyDays on February 18, 2021, 09:52:30 AM
I hate redundancy. Especially "exactly the same" or "the same exact thing." It just bugs me.
Someone pointed out that you don't have to say "hot water heater" - it's just "water heater." Hadn't thought about that one.
I guess that's true. Shouldn't it be called "cold water heater?" If the water is already hot, why heat it?
Post by: merula on February 18, 2021, 10:25:39 AM
Someone pointed out that you don't have to say "hot water heater" - it's just "water heater." Hadn't thought about that one.
I guess that's true. Shouldn't it be called "cold water heater?" If the water is already hot, why heat it?
It's also misleading to sell Hot Pockets. You buy a Cold Pocket and have to add the Hot yourself. Advertising lies!
Post by: Metalcat on February 18, 2021, 12:47:51 PM
I hate redundancy. Especially "exactly the same" or "the same exact thing." It just bugs me.
Someone pointed out that you don't have to say "hot water heater" - it's just "water heater." Hadn't thought about that one.
I guess that's true. Shouldn't it be called "cold water heater?" If the water is already hot, why heat it?
Depends on how you parse it.
For example, if I were to refer to grandma as the sweater knitter, I wouldn't be corrected with "no, she knits the yarn, and a sweater results".
A hot water heater is like a sweater knitter, the heater creates the hot water. It's the thing that's creating the result you have described.
A cold water heater describes the object of the action of the heating, so it's also correct. More correct than calling grandma a yarn knitter, because knitting doesn't specify the outcome, while heating does.
But both are redundant because water heater alone clearly indicates that it will heat cold water into hot water. So regardless, it's a wasted word.
Thankfully for me, I enjoy redundancy, it's great for the more poetic uses of language. Twelve conjugations of "fuck" in a sentence are far more effective at getting a point across than just one.
"What the fuck?" could be a casual, light hearted question.
But "what the fucking, fuck, fuckballs, fuckery?" really grasps the nuances of someone's utter, ragey disbelief.
Post by: BlueHouse on February 18, 2021, 04:15:48 PM
Post by: merula on February 19, 2021, 07:00:00 AM
How about Nother? as in "that's a whole nother story"
Man, for a thread about neologisms, we seem to find fault with original usage a lot:
https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2008/11/nother-wise.html
Post by: Dicey on February 19, 2021, 07:42:33 AM
Thanks, that's a fun rabbit hole!How about Nother? as in "that's a whole nother story"Man, for a thread about neologisms, we seem to find fault with original usage a lot:
https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2008/11/nother-wise.html
Post by: jehovasfitness23 on February 19, 2021, 07:42:52 AM
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on February 19, 2021, 08:02:55 AM
Post by: Metalcat on February 19, 2021, 08:10:30 AM
parse
Clearly someone who never studied linguistics.
Or, someone who really hated studying linguistics, lol.
Post by: BlueHouse on February 21, 2021, 08:33:19 AM
How about Nother? as in "that's a whole nother story"
Man, for a thread about neologisms, we seem to find fault with original usage a lot:
https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2008/11/nother-wise.html
YASSSS! I'm totally getting my family with this one! We're a family of grammar nazis (although, since this thread started, I have stepped off my soap box because I realize just how poor my grammar skills really are). So I'm using this one against my brother right now. Thank you!!!
Post by: BlueMR2 on February 21, 2021, 11:24:29 AM
It's so overused that at this point just hearing those words makes me assume the person speaking them is having a desperate knee jerk emotional reaction and I disregard everything they are saying.
Post by: Dicey on February 21, 2021, 03:42:13 PM
Can we kill off "we need to change the narrative" now please?Aw, c'mon, doesn't everyone love "Hamilton"?
It's so overused that at this point just hearing those words makes me assume the person speaking them is having a desperate knee jerk emotional reaction and I disregard everything they are saying.
Post by: Dicey on February 23, 2021, 02:55:47 PM
Post by: merula on February 23, 2021, 03:17:21 PM
Enjoy!
This is gold!
I just have two questions: is "pawn off" purported to be used incorrectly here? I know it's sometimes confused for "palm off" but they're both valid, just slightly different. And what the hell is "Monday world" supposed to be?
Post by: nessness on February 23, 2021, 03:43:55 PM
I had the same two questions! I googled and there is apparently debate on whether "pawn off" is a valid expression or an error. I use "pawn off" all the time; maybe I should stop.Enjoy!
This is gold!
I just have two questions: is "pawn off" purported to be used incorrectly here? I know it's sometimes confused for "palm off" but they're both valid, just slightly different. And what the hell is "Monday world" supposed to be?
"Mundane world" is my best guess for "Monday world", but I don't think that's a common expression, so I could definitely be wrong.
Post by: teen persuasion on February 24, 2021, 08:07:47 AM
parse
Clearly someone who never studied linguistics.
Or, someone who really hated studying linguistics, lol.
Or, someone taking Compiler Construction.
Post by: jinga nation on February 24, 2021, 09:13:33 AM
use of do/doing:
- Do the kneading of the bread.
- We're doing the painting of <subject>.
I'm teaching my kids to not use this, instead say:
- Knead the bread.
- We're painting <subject>.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on February 24, 2021, 09:30:26 AM
;-)
Post by: sui generis on February 24, 2021, 10:03:07 AM
Perhaps you should be teaching them to say We are painting <subject>.
;-)
Wait, people want contractions to go away now?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 24, 2021, 10:26:15 AM
Perhaps you should be teaching them to say We are painting <subject>.
;-)
Wait, people want contractions to go away now?
I love contractions in speech, the words flow more easily. Written? Depends on how formal the writing is. Just get the contractions right! As in, spell correct won't rescue you from there/their/they're.
Post by: simonsez on February 25, 2021, 11:00:01 AM
Post by: Kris on February 25, 2021, 11:56:29 AM
Sigh...
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 25, 2021, 01:06:17 PM
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? ;-)
Post by: teen persuasion on February 25, 2021, 01:26:45 PM
In February?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? ;-)
Post by: GuitarStv on February 25, 2021, 02:12:56 PM
In February?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? ;-)
You've never met dedicated nudists?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 25, 2021, 03:40:16 PM
In February?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? ;-)
You've never met dedicated nudists?
The Carribean, Mexico, lots of warm places. ;-) or sauna the traditional way.
Post by: Frugal Lizard on February 26, 2021, 07:32:02 AM
thank you for the laugh out loud imageIn February?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? ;-)
You've never met dedicated nudists?
Post by: teen persuasion on March 04, 2021, 08:27:30 AM
Hmm... Frugal Lizard, Ontario; GuitarStv, Ontario; RetiredAt63, Ontario; teen persuasion, just south of Lake Ontario...thank you for the laugh out loud imageIn February?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? ;-)
You've never met dedicated nudists?
Post by: Need2Save on March 11, 2021, 01:06:42 PM
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!
Post by: Paul der Krake on March 11, 2021, 01:15:24 PM
https://twitter.com/yayalexisgay/status/1369346460911734784
Post by: BlueHouse on March 11, 2021, 02:33:36 PM
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.
Post by: sui generis on March 11, 2021, 04:44:10 PM
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.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on March 11, 2021, 05:24:18 PM
Post by: Dicey on March 19, 2021, 04:15:43 PM
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..
Post by: dandarc on March 19, 2021, 04:31:17 PM
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.
Post by: shelivesthedream on March 19, 2021, 04:33:35 PM
"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.
Post by: dandarc on March 19, 2021, 04:52:23 PM
you've never seen on the stage"
But maybe I'm misreading the OP this and it is 3 real people?
Post by: Dicey on March 19, 2021, 05:04:54 PM
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, whoThose 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.
you've never seen on the stage"
But maybe I'm misreading the OP this and it is 3 real people?
Post by: shelivesthedream on March 19, 2021, 05:18:35 PM
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.
Post by: Dicey on March 19, 2021, 05:30:13 PM
"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!
Post by: Morning Glory on March 19, 2021, 06:10:19 PM
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
Post by: SunnyDays on March 19, 2021, 08:00:01 PM
Post by: Dicey on March 19, 2021, 08:47:01 PM
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"?
Post by: BicycleB on March 19, 2021, 10:18:10 PM
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.)
Post by: Morning Glory on March 19, 2021, 10:59:01 PM
No I just googled it, it looks cuteI 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"?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 20, 2021, 04:35:56 PM
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! ;-(
Post by: merula on March 22, 2021, 11:07:36 AM
"...you continue to ecru reward points..."
Maybe it's a text-to-speech error?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 22, 2021, 05:56:22 PM
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.
Post by: Metalcat on March 22, 2021, 06:04:01 PM
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
Post by: Taran Wanderer on March 22, 2021, 06:45:52 PM
Post by: nereo on March 22, 2021, 07:23:36 PM
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.
Post by: Kris on March 22, 2021, 08:05:27 PM
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.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on March 23, 2021, 11:31:26 PM
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!
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on March 26, 2021, 07:28:27 PM
I have been seeing “decent” instead of “descent” a fair amount lately.
Oh my!
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on March 26, 2021, 07:34:02 PM
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.
Post by: Travis on March 26, 2021, 07:53:14 PM
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on March 27, 2021, 02:07:47 AM
Post by: SunnyDays on March 27, 2021, 10:05:50 AM
Post by: Tigerpine on March 31, 2021, 07:01:39 PM
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.
Post by: Dollar Slice on March 31, 2021, 07:21:49 PM
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."
Post by: Tigerpine on March 31, 2021, 07:31:56 PM
This is a really old one, 15 years minimum.Thanks! And that explains why I didn't know that one. 15 years ago I was overseas.
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."
Post by: Morning Glory on March 31, 2021, 08:02:57 PM
This is a really old one, 15 years minimum.Thanks! And that explains why I didn't know that one. 15 years ago I was overseas.
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."
I've never heard that one either.
Post by: Metalcat on April 01, 2021, 05:39:30 AM
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.
Post by: GreenSheep on April 05, 2021, 05:16:38 AM
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.
Post by: Travis on April 05, 2021, 06:28:09 AM
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.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 05, 2021, 01:03:33 PM
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
Post by: Morning Glory on April 05, 2021, 01:11:51 PM
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.
Post by: Metalcat on April 05, 2021, 01:22:40 PM
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"
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on April 05, 2021, 05:51:53 PM
This is a really old one, 15 years minimum.Thanks! And that explains why I didn't know that one. 15 years ago I was overseas.
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."
I've never heard that one either.
+1
Post by: Dee on April 05, 2021, 06:19:13 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on April 05, 2021, 06:58:48 PM
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...!
Post by: Morning Glory on April 05, 2021, 09:25:49 PM
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 😁
Post by: Dee on April 05, 2021, 09:28:51 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on April 06, 2021, 05:20:18 AM
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.
Post by: merula on April 06, 2021, 07:59:26 AM
"Fold in the cheese"
"You just fold it in!"
Post by: teen persuasion on April 07, 2021, 09:43:58 AM
Post by: GuitarStv on April 07, 2021, 10:09:05 AM
Just saw this on Bogleheads: "ignore the neigh-sayers".
Mr. Ed does not want to be ignored.
Post by: Frugal Lizard on April 07, 2021, 10:16:43 AM
I give "fold in" a pass because it is a technical way of stirring in something such as egg whites or white cream so that it gets combined without loosing the air that was beaten into previously. But if the cheese in question is just cheese and going into somethings without the need to protect the lightness or airiness then that would not get a pass."Fold in the cheese"
"You just fold it in!"
Post by: Metalcat on April 07, 2021, 10:56:42 AM
I give "fold in" a pass because it is a technical way of stirring in something such as egg whites or white cream so that it gets combined without loosing the air that was beaten into previously. But if the cheese in question is just cheese and going into somethings without the need to protect the lightness or airiness then that would not get a pass."Fold in the cheese"
"You just fold it in!"
It's a joke.
It's a Schitt's Creek reference.
Post by: BlueHouse on April 07, 2021, 01:34:15 PM
I give "fold in" a pass because it is a technical way of stirring in something such as egg whites or white cream so that it gets combined without loosing the air that was beaten into previously. But if the cheese in question is just cheese and going into somethings without the need to protect the lightness or airiness then that would not get a pass."Fold in the cheese"
"You just fold it in!"
But how do you fold little bits of broken cheese?
Post by: merula on April 07, 2021, 02:19:48 PM
But how do you fold little bits of broken cheese?How? How do you fold it? Do you fold it in half like a piece of paper and drop it in the pot, or what do you do?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NywzrUJnmTo
Post by: Metalcat on April 07, 2021, 02:29:58 PM
But how do you fold little bits of broken cheese?How? How do you fold it? Do you fold it in half like a piece of paper and drop it in the pot, or what do you do?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NywzrUJnmTo
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO BE ANY CLEARER.
Post by: Frugal Lizard on April 07, 2021, 03:41:42 PM
oops, continuing my geeky existence of not understanding cultural references.I give "fold in" a pass because it is a technical way of stirring in something such as egg whites or white cream so that it gets combined without loosing the air that was beaten into previously. But if the cheese in question is just cheese and going into somethings without the need to protect the lightness or airiness then that would not get a pass."Fold in the cheese"
"You just fold it in!"
It's a joke.
It's a Schitt's Creek reference.
Post by: Dollar Slice on April 07, 2021, 04:18:23 PM
oops, continuing my geeky existence of not understanding cultural references.
Never a bad thing to realize that you missed a joke because you failed to spend forty hours of your life watching a TV show... :-)
Post by: Metalcat on April 07, 2021, 04:30:00 PM
oops, continuing my geeky existence of not understanding cultural references.
Never a bad thing to realize that you missed a joke because you failed to spend forty hours of your life watching a TV show... :-)
Lol, exactly. None of us are cool for watching Schitt's Creek. Schitt's Creek is cool, but it's not a transitive property.
Post by: LaineyAZ on April 08, 2021, 09:01:37 PM
I know I'm officially a senior citizen but geez. I think language and grammar skills are going backwards in our country as it is, but now we're all expected to talk like teenagers? Ugh.
Post by: Metalcat on April 08, 2021, 09:59:10 PM
Can I just be grumpy and say how much I dislike how many words have become baby-fied? Southwest Airlines just sent me an email about options for my "vacay."
I know I'm officially a senior citizen but geez. I think language and grammar skills are going backwards in our country as it is, but now we're all expected to talk like teenagers? Ugh.
Shortening words is definitely not particular to teenagers. Middle aged folks have been guilty of this for a long, long time.
Post by: nereo on April 09, 2021, 05:22:50 AM
It annoys me as someone who’s studied and taught statistics, where the concept of independent events is key. No, just because I drove my toddler to daycare with my coffee-cup perched on the roof without falling doesn’t mean I’m any more likely to win the lottery.
Plus, playing the lottery is stupid.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 09, 2021, 08:51:57 AM
The phrase: “You should buy a lottery ticket!” - said when a person experiences some random unlikely event.
It annoys me as someone who’s studied and taught statistics, where the concept of independent events is key. No, just because I drove my toddler to daycare with my coffee-cup perched on the roof without falling doesn’t mean I’m any more likely to win the lottery.
Plus, playing the lottery is stupid.
I just take that as a way of saying you are lucky today.
If anyone who knows me says that to me they are definitely just saying I was lucky, because I don't buy lottery tickets. To go OT, I know families who buy lottery tickets as part of their
Christmas presents for each other. I've always wondered about unspoken expectations of possible sharing of big winnings.
Post by: nereo on April 09, 2021, 12:16:16 PM
The phrase: “You should buy a lottery ticket!” - said when a person experiences some random unlikely event.
It annoys me as someone who’s studied and taught statistics, where the concept of independent events is key. No, just because I drove my toddler to daycare with my coffee-cup perched on the roof without falling doesn’t mean I’m any more likely to win the lottery.
Plus, playing the lottery is stupid.
I just take that as a way of saying you are lucky today.
If anyone who knows me says that to me they are definitely just saying I was lucky, because I don't buy lottery tickets. To go OT, I know families who buy lottery tickets as part of their
Christmas presents for each other. I've always wondered about unspoken expectations of possible sharing of big winnings.
Ha! This is our family. It's the one and only time I get lottery tickets, and my parents confessed that it started as a way of keeping my otherwise distractible brother occupied for 10-15 minutes while people were unwrapping presents.
We've also had the discussion about who would share the winnings should one person hit 'the big one' - tellingly my parents, sister and I have all sworn we'd divide any winnings >$200 equally among the family members, though my brother has said "i'm keeping it all for myself". Which brings up the question whether we'd cut him in on a big payout (we probably would...).
I work with a bunch of guys who buy scratchers every damn payday. Like they'll go to the corner store (or depanneur, if you prefer) and get 20 tickets of so. Every so often they'll come out ahead, 'justifying' the spending spurge. So depressing... not surprisingly they have no savings to speak of.
Post by: Morning Glory on April 09, 2021, 12:50:06 PM
The phrase: “You should buy a lottery ticket!” - said when a person experiences some random unlikely event.
It annoys me as someone who’s studied and taught statistics, where the concept of independent events is key. No, just because I drove my toddler to daycare with my coffee-cup perched on the roof without falling doesn’t mean I’m any more likely to win the lottery.
Plus, playing the lottery is stupid.
I just take that as a way of saying you are lucky today.
If anyone who knows me says that to me they are definitely just saying I was lucky, because I don't buy lottery tickets. To go OT, I know families who buy lottery tickets as part of their
Christmas presents for each other. I've always wondered about unspoken expectations of possible sharing of big winnings.
Ha! This is our family. It's the one and only time I get lottery tickets, and my parents confessed that it started as a way of keeping my otherwise distractible brother occupied for 10-15 minutes while people were unwrapping presents.
We've also had the discussion about who would share the winnings should one person hit 'the big one' - tellingly my parents, sister and I have all sworn we'd divide any winnings >$200 equally among the family members, though my brother has said "i'm keeping it all for myself". Which brings up the question whether we'd cut him in on a big payout (we probably would...).
I work with a bunch of guys who buy scratchers every damn payday. Like they'll go to the corner store (or depanneur, if you prefer) and get 20 tickets of so. Every so often they'll come out ahead, 'justifying' the spending spurge. So depressing... not surprisingly they have no savings to speak of.
My mom does this too. Every year we get a couple scratch tickets in our Christmas stockings. Seems pretty harmless if it's only once a year. We all know we're not going to win big so there's no sense in talking about what would happen.
Post by: Jimbo on April 09, 2021, 01:09:59 PM
This happened until some years back we realized: you know, even if we win, those things pay out like 10 or 25k$... That is not a life changing amount at all... And then the 'what would we do with this money' talks were answered by 'add it to the pile/pay back a portion of the house loan'... Quite boring.
Haven't bought them since.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 09, 2021, 02:31:07 PM
I have a 'funny' story with scratchoff lottery tickets. I'll confess to something: my wife and I enjoyed them for entertainment in the past. We bought them maybe once or twice a year, so not a big deal. But still, we were entertained I guess.
This happened until some years back we realized: you know, even if we win, those things pay out like 10 or 25k$... That is not a life changing amount at all... And then the 'what would we do with this money' talks were answered by 'add it to the pile/pay back a portion of the house loan'... Quite boring.
Haven't bought them since.
If we are going to buy them, let's go big and get 6/49s. ;-)
Post by: merula on April 09, 2021, 03:20:53 PM
Honestly, the best thing that's happened so far was when all $20 were duds, because most of the time there's like $2 in winnings and now I have a chore to go into a gas station to redeem them and it's hardly worthwhile.
Post by: sui generis on April 09, 2021, 06:03:18 PM
It's weird, as the fewer / less question has only become really noticeable to me in the last few years. I used to have to *think* about which word to use. But now when someone says the wrong one, I feel it in my bones without having to consciously consider whether the item in question can be counted or not.
And I wonder if there are people that feel this way about further / farther. Because I swear I will never learn that one.
Post by: Metalcat on April 09, 2021, 06:19:01 PM
Just read an article where the author wrote something about doing "less repetitions."
It's weird, as the fewer / less question has only become really noticeable to me in the last few years. I used to have to *think* about which word to use. But now when someone says the wrong one, I feel it in my bones without having to consciously consider whether the item in question can be counted or not.
And I wonder if there are people that feel this way about further / farther. Because I swear I will never learn that one.
Isn't "farther" for physical distance and "further" for conceptual distance?
As in:
"My house is a little farther down the road"
And
"My project should be further along by now"
Post by: sui generis on April 09, 2021, 06:51:23 PM
Just read an article where the author wrote something about doing "less repetitions."
It's weird, as the fewer / less question has only become really noticeable to me in the last few years. I used to have to *think* about which word to use. But now when someone says the wrong one, I feel it in my bones without having to consciously consider whether the item in question can be counted or not.
And I wonder if there are people that feel this way about further / farther. Because I swear I will never learn that one.
Isn't "farther" for physical distance and "further" for conceptual distance?
As in:
"My house is a little farther down the road"
And
"My project should be further along by now"
Maybe? I could look it up right now obviously, but why bother when I'll just forget again in 20 minutes? That sounds very familiar, I know it's something like that, but it's just never taken hold in my brain.
Post by: Metalcat on April 09, 2021, 07:02:33 PM
Just read an article where the author wrote something about doing "less repetitions."
It's weird, as the fewer / less question has only become really noticeable to me in the last few years. I used to have to *think* about which word to use. But now when someone says the wrong one, I feel it in my bones without having to consciously consider whether the item in question can be counted or not.
And I wonder if there are people that feel this way about further / farther. Because I swear I will never learn that one.
Isn't "farther" for physical distance and "further" for conceptual distance?
As in:
"My house is a little farther down the road"
And
"My project should be further along by now"
Maybe? I could look it up right now obviously, but why bother when I'll just forget again in 20 minutes? That sounds very familiar, I know it's something like that, but it's just never taken hold in my brain.
I had never actually thought about it, that's just what made sense to me. But I googled it, and it seems accurate.
To me, something is "far" and something more far is "farther".
Nothing is "fur" or more "fur", so that's the more abstract one.
Evidently, according to Google, the distinction is more American, whereas historically, they were more interchangeable.
Post by: Dicey on April 09, 2021, 08:21:08 PM
There's a great bit on this point in the movie, "Finding Forrester", which is a great little film. I always use the concept of physical distance to tell the difference, but far/fur is a good trick, too.Just read an article where the author wrote something about doing "less repetitions."
It's weird, as the fewer / less question has only become really noticeable to me in the last few years. I used to have to *think* about which word to use. But now when someone says the wrong one, I feel it in my bones without having to consciously consider whether the item in question can be counted or not.
And I wonder if there are people that feel this way about further / farther. Because I swear I will never learn that one.
Isn't "farther" for physical distance and "further" for conceptual distance?
As in:
"My house is a little farther down the road"
And
"My project should be further along by now"
Maybe? I could look it up right now obviously, but why bother when I'll just forget again in 20 minutes? That sounds very familiar, I know it's something like that, but it's just never taken hold in my brain.
I had never actually thought about it, that's just what made sense to me. But I googled it, and it seems accurate.
To me, something is "far" and something more far is "farther".
Nothing is "fur" or more "fur", so that's the more abstract one.
Evidently, according to Google, the distinction is more American, whereas historically, they were more interchangeable.
And @sui generis, that one drives me crazy! I've noticed it a lot lately from people who should know better.
Post by: Jenny Wren on April 09, 2021, 10:21:48 PM
Can I just be grumpy and say how much I dislike how many words have become baby-fied? Southwest Airlines just sent me an email about options for my "vacay."
This made me think of one of my huge peeves - the word "baby" being used instead of "new" or "novice." As in: "I'm a baby gardener" or "I'm a baby cook." I recently had someone contact me for professional advice, and they started out with, "I'm just a baby writer.." No you are not! Although I am sure there is an infant prodigy our there somewhere that can write, you are not that prodigy. You are a 38, Susan. You haven't been a "baby anything" for quite some time.
It's almost always grown-ass women that I hear using this term. It makes me cringe every single time. I've spent much of my adult life in male-dominated spaces where it is a common tactic to infantilize females. Must we do it to ourselves as well?
Post by: slackmax on April 10, 2021, 07:21:52 AM
"Joy, what did you do today?" "So, I went to the store"
Now they are using the word "Ya" instead of so, to answer any question.
"Joy, what did you do today?" "Ya, I went to the store"
Political types do this on TV interviews a lot.
Why do they need a cute intro word? Why not just answer the question? Annoying.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on April 10, 2021, 11:25:25 AM
Post by: Dollar Slice on April 10, 2021, 02:03:03 PM
Used to be the cute word to start off an answer to any question was "so".
...
Why do they need a cute intro word? Why not just answer the question? Annoying.
Ironically, I'm finding your use of the word "cute" in this post to be very irritating :-)
I think repeatedly starting sentences with words like "So, ... " "Yeah, ..." "Well, ..." is a mental delaying tactic. Maybe it would be awkward not to respond immediately to a question (like in an interview); maybe they are in a conversation where they're trying to get their foot in the door and not let someone else start talking (which could be aggressive or defensive depending on who they're talking to). Whatever the situation, the bottom line is that they haven't quite formulated what they want to say yet, so they give themselves a moment to think with a filler word.
With some people it seems to become a constant habit and it even creeps into their written language when replying quickly (e.g. in text chats or social media comments). I have a friend who is constantly text-message responding to me with "So, ..." messages.
Post by: GreenSheep on April 10, 2021, 02:58:10 PM
The above isn't even a terribly egregious example. It's amazing how many "ums" and "uhs" and "you knows" and other absolutely irritating verbal tics I hear from professional speakers!!
On the other hand, I also hear people say "no" when they mean "yes" -- even something as blatant as, "These are the best tacos ever!" "No, I totally agree!" And then there's "Yeah, NO." That one apparently means "no" despite the "yeah" at the beginning. Le sigh... I'm a native English speaker, and I find this annoying. I can't imagine what someone who's learning English must think!
Post by: sui generis on April 10, 2021, 04:20:37 PM
I hear a lot of people in interviews answer a question with "Yeah..." even if it wasn't a yes or no question, or even if the answer is actually negative. "Tell us about how you got started with this." "Yeah, it was about 10 years ago..." I guess it's a filler word, and it doesn't bother me much when it's just an average person answering questions, but when it's someone who speaks professionally for all or part of their income... they should know better, and they should listen to recordings of themselves to help themselves improve.
The above isn't even a terribly egregious example. It's amazing how many "ums" and "uhs" and "you knows" and other absolutely irritating verbal tics I hear from professional speakers!!
On the other hand, I also hear people say "no" when they mean "yes" -- even something as blatant as, "These are the best tacos ever!" "No, I totally agree!" And then there's "Yeah, NO." That one apparently means "no" despite the "yeah" at the beginning. Le sigh... I'm a native English speaker, and I find this annoying. I can't imagine what someone who's learning English must think!
I remember when "yeah no" was getting started and felt like it was definitely meant as a way the speaker sort of pretends they were easing from a socially lubricating agreement with the listener into a firm disagreement. It felt a little funny and like it definitely has its appropriate uses at the time. Now it's just used rampantly for no reason at all it seems.
I totally do not get the phenomenon of starting an agreement with the word no, though. I've really tried to consider whether there's some implied other thing they are negating before they get to an agreement (like is it usually used in response to a statement like, "I might be crazy, but I love tacos" and so the no is negating the person being crazy and the rest of the sentence is agreeing about tacos) but in most actual uses I don't see it at all.
Post by: JetBlast on April 10, 2021, 05:17:17 PM
The right wing has turned it into a word to mock any ideas they disagree with and anyone who promotes those ideas. Instead of accepting that someone could have a different opinion, they confidently assert that anyone promoting an idea they don’t like is just trying to “act woke” to avoid getting “cancelled” by left wing mobs.
Post by: Travis on April 11, 2021, 05:48:23 PM
I hear a lot of people in interviews answer a question with "Yeah..." even if it wasn't a yes or no question, or even if the answer is actually negative. "Tell us about how you got started with this." "Yeah, it was about 10 years ago..." I guess it's a filler word, and it doesn't bother me much when it's just an average person answering questions, but when it's someone who speaks professionally for all or part of their income... they should know better, and they should listen to recordings of themselves to help themselves improve.
The above isn't even a terribly egregious example. It's amazing how many "ums" and "uhs" and "you knows" and other absolutely irritating verbal tics I hear from professional speakers!!
On the other hand, I also hear people say "no" when they mean "yes" -- even something as blatant as, "These are the best tacos ever!" "No, I totally agree!" And then there's "Yeah, NO." That one apparently means "no" despite the "yeah" at the beginning. Le sigh... I'm a native English speaker, and I find this annoying. I can't imagine what someone who's learning English must think!
I remember when "yeah no" was getting started and felt like it was definitely meant as a way the speaker sort of pretends they were easing from a socially lubricating agreement with the listener into a firm disagreement. It felt a little funny and like it definitely has its appropriate uses at the time. Now it's just used rampantly for no reason at all it seems.
I totally do not get the phenomenon of starting an agreement with the word no, though. I've really tried to consider whether there's some implied other thing they are negating before they get to an agreement (like is it usually used in response to a statement like, "I might be crazy, but I love tacos" and so the no is negating the person being crazy and the rest of the sentence is agreeing about tacos) but in most actual uses I don't see it at all.
It's the new "um" to begin your statement. I do it all the time (um and yeah). For some reason, the first word out of my mouth isn't what I actually need to say unless it's something I've rehearsed in my head. My wife was a national-level debater in high school and it drives her nuts when professional speakers are uming all over the place. I was in a lecture at one of my military schools and the subject matter was already dry. The speaker had no idea what he was talking about and spent most of time time quoting directly from the textbook. I started marking my notes every time he said "um" and "basically." I think every 10th word was one of them.
"Yeah - no." is meant to have an air of sarcasm. I'm not just disagreeing with you, but I'm making fun of you by briefly making it look like I might see your point of view.
Post by: RWD on April 13, 2021, 08:44:20 AM
Post by: nereo on April 13, 2021, 10:25:56 AM
"Touch base" and other corporate manager-speak substituted for having actual concrete goals for a meeting.
Makes me think of this:
https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4 (https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4)
Post by: RWD on April 13, 2021, 10:56:12 AM
"Touch base" and other corporate manager-speak substituted for having actual concrete goals for a meeting.
Makes me think of this:
https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4 (https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4)
Haha, that link was exactly what I was expecting.
Post by: GreenSheep on April 13, 2021, 11:26:06 AM
"Touch base" and other corporate manager-speak substituted for having actual concrete goals for a meeting.
This reminds me of someone I know who always says "touch bases." Plural. Why?!!
Post by: nereo on April 13, 2021, 12:34:03 PM
"Touch base" and other corporate manager-speak substituted for having actual concrete goals for a meeting.
This reminds me of someone I know who always says "touch bases." Plural. Why?!!
Maybe they won’t settle for a single...?
Post by: slackmax on April 13, 2021, 02:17:34 PM
I noticed that the captioning I have on was removing the "Yeahs". I suppose that's a good thing.
Post by: SunnyDays on April 13, 2021, 05:39:09 PM
The above isn't even a terribly egregious example. It's amazing how many "ums" and "uhs" and "you knows" and other absolutely irritating verbal tics I hear from professional speakers!!
I remember when "yeah no" was getting started and felt like it was definitely meant as a way the speaker sort of pretends they were easing from a socially lubricating agreement with the listener into a firm disagreement. It felt a little funny and like it definitely has its appropriate uses at the time. Now it's just used rampantly for no reason at all it seems.
It's the new "um" to begin your statement. I do it all the time (um and yeah). For some reason, the first word out of my mouth isn't what I actually need to say unless it's something I've rehearsed in my head. My wife was a national-level debater in high school and it drives her nuts when professional speakers are uming all over the place. I was in a lecture at one of my military schools and the subject matter was already dry. The speaker had no idea what he was talking about and spent most of time time quoting directly from the textbook. I started marking my notes every time he said "um" and "basically." I think every 10th word was one of them.
All of those filler words decrease the speaker’s credibility. Justin Trudeau can’t get through a sentence without saying “uh.” He’s the Prime Minister for God’s sake, get some speech lessons.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 13, 2021, 05:44:02 PM
The above isn't even a terribly egregious example. It's amazing how many "ums" and "uhs" and "you knows" and other absolutely irritating verbal tics I hear from professional speakers!!
I remember when "yeah no" was getting started and felt like it was definitely meant as a way the speaker sort of pretends they were easing from a socially lubricating agreement with the listener into a firm disagreement. It felt a little funny and like it definitely has its appropriate uses at the time. Now it's just used rampantly for no reason at all it seems.
It's the new "um" to begin your statement. I do it all the time (um and yeah). For some reason, the first word out of my mouth isn't what I actually need to say unless it's something I've rehearsed in my head. My wife was a national-level debater in high school and it drives her nuts when professional speakers are uming all over the place. I was in a lecture at one of my military schools and the subject matter was already dry. The speaker had no idea what he was talking about and spent most of time time quoting directly from the textbook. I started marking my notes every time he said "um" and "basically." I think every 10th word was one of them.
All of those filler words decrease the speaker’s credibility. Justin Trudeau can’t get through a sentence without saying “uh.” He’s the Prime Minister for God’s sake, get some speech lessons.
And he taught drama? Imagine going to a play and having actors saying uh and yeah and er. It would be authentic. And boring.
Post by: solon on April 16, 2021, 10:05:18 AM
What's the word for "reduce by 90%"?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 16, 2021, 10:07:51 AM
You know how "decimate" means "reduce by 10%"? I'm looking for the inverse of that.
What's the word for "reduce by 90%"?
These days? Decimate. Apparently it now means 10% are left. And yes, I know that is not what it really means, it just seems to be used that way.
Post by: nereo on April 16, 2021, 10:25:22 AM
You know how "decimate" means "reduce by 10%"? I'm looking for the inverse of that.
What's the word for "reduce by 90%"?
These days? Decimate. Apparently it now means 10% are left. And yes, I know that is not what it really means, it just seems to be used that way.
I’ll admit to not knowing this, but after considering the word “deci” (ten) it makes perfect sense...
Post by: Captain Cactus on April 16, 2021, 10:29:19 AM
Post by: sui generis on April 16, 2021, 10:38:48 AM
You know how "decimate" means "reduce by 10%"? I'm looking for the inverse of that.
What's the word for "reduce by 90%"?
These days? Decimate. Apparently it now means 10% are left. And yes, I know that is not what it really means, it just seems to be used that way.
I’ll admit to not knowing this, but after considering the word “deci” (ten) it makes perfect sense...
Given that noni- (or sometimes novi-?) are prefixes referring to 90s, I would guess it would technically be nonimate.
Post by: nereo on April 16, 2021, 11:10:45 AM
Probably already identified in the previous posts of the thread, but I'll add my 2 cents on the various phrases used to "normalize" unhealthy, etc... behaviors.
Huh? I'm don't understand what you mean here...
Post by: nessness on April 16, 2021, 11:42:16 AM
I think this is a reference to the very first post of the thread.Probably already identified in the previous posts of the thread, but I'll add my 2 cents on the various phrases used to "normalize" unhealthy, etc... behaviors.
Huh? I'm don't understand what you mean here...
Post by: merula on April 19, 2021, 06:54:09 AM
You know how "decimate" means "reduce by 10%"? I'm looking for the inverse of that.
What's the word for "reduce by 90%"?
These days? Decimate. Apparently it now means 10% are left. And yes, I know that is not what it really means, it just seems to be used that way.
I’ll admit to not knowing this, but after considering the word “deci” (ten) it makes perfect sense...
Given that noni- (or sometimes novi-?) are prefixes referring to 90s, I would guess it would technically be nonimate.
That'd be "reduce by one in nine". I don't think there's a word for reduce by nine of ten.
Post by: BlueHouse on April 21, 2021, 06:51:01 AM
I think anyone who uses this word isn't using it correctly. They use it to attack and judge others and they also use it to justify bad behavior.
Not just today -- going back decades. I don't want this to turn political, so no need to call out who you think uses it correctly/incorrectly. Let's just agree that whatever side of the political spectrum you're on, you think the other side uses the word wrong. Therefore, it's become a nonsense word and should go away.
Post by: nereo on April 21, 2021, 06:58:32 AM
This has become ubiquitous among politicians across the ideological spectrum.
It's like the free-space on your buzz-word bingo card, having supplanted "common-sense legislation" popular a decade or so ago.
Every time I hear it I want to sarcastically respond: "Nooo.... let's obfuscate! That's soooo much better!"
Post by: Nick_Miller on April 21, 2021, 07:37:35 AM
Patriot.
I think anyone who uses this word isn't using it correctly. They use it to attack and judge others and they also use it to justify bad behavior.
Not just today -- going back decades. I don't want this to turn political, so no need to call out who you think uses it correctly/incorrectly. Let's just agree that whatever side of the political spectrum you're on, you think the other side uses the word wrong. Therefore, it's become a nonsense word and should go away.
Yeah it's hard to think of using "Patriot" these days without it being utilized in loaded political terms. As an aside, have you noticed that people on Twitter who put "patriot" in their bio are generally some of the biggest ass hats on the planet? So I think that supports your point.
Another word I hate hearing is "onboarding." God I hate corporate speak, with their "optics" and onboarding" and crap. I'm very lucky to have never had to work for a big corporation. I wouldn't last a week.
Post by: GreenSheep on April 21, 2021, 08:04:11 AM
"Let's Be Clear"
This has become ubiquitous among politicians across the ideological spectrum.
It's like the free-space on your buzz-word bingo card, having supplanted "common-sense legislation" popular a decade or so ago.
Every time I hear it I want to sarcastically respond: "Nooo.... let's obfuscate! That's soooo much better!"
Makes me think of "I'll be honest" or "Honestly" or "Truthfully" or, my favorite (ugh), "Not gonna lie." Because if you don't preface a sentence with that, I should assume you're lying...?! Shouldn't we always try to be clear in our communications? Do we really need to say that we're going to be clear?
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on April 21, 2021, 09:53:26 AM
Patriot.
I think anyone who uses this word isn't using it correctly. They use it to attack and judge others and they also use it to justify bad behavior.
Not just today -- going back decades. I don't want this to turn political, so no need to call out who you think uses it correctly/incorrectly. Let's just agree that whatever side of the political spectrum you're on, you think the other side uses the word wrong. Therefore, it's become a nonsense word and should go away.
Yeah it's hard to think of using "Patriot" these days without it being utilized in loaded political terms. As an aside, have you noticed that people on Twitter who put "patriot" in their bio are generally some of the biggest ass hats on the planet? So I think that supports your point.
Another word I hate hearing is "onboarding." God I hate corporate speak, with their "optics" and onboarding" and crap. I'm very lucky to have never had to work for a big corporation. I wouldn't last a week.
They say 'patriot'. I hear 'nationalist'.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 21, 2021, 10:17:01 AM
Patriot.
I think anyone who uses this word isn't using it correctly. They use it to attack and judge others and they also use it to justify bad behavior.
Not just today -- going back decades. I don't want this to turn political, so no need to call out who you think uses it correctly/incorrectly. Let's just agree that whatever side of the political spectrum you're on, you think the other side uses the word wrong. Therefore, it's become a nonsense word and should go away.
Yeah it's hard to think of using "Patriot" these days without it being utilized in loaded political terms. As an aside, have you noticed that people on Twitter who put "patriot" in their bio are generally some of the biggest ass hats on the planet? So I think that supports your point.
They say 'patriot'. I hear 'nationalist'.
It's all viewpoint.
When an American says "patriot" in terms of their rebellion, I think "traitor". The "patriots" were the ones who stayed loyal to the Crown and ended up as political refugees*. Including a few of my ancestors. ;-) So, viewpoint, always.
*Yes the United Empire Loyalists were political refugees. The term just hadn't been invented yet.
Post by: nereo on April 21, 2021, 12:10:06 PM
It's all viewpoint.
When an American says "patriot" in terms of their rebellion, I think "traitor". The "patriots" were the ones who stayed loyal to the Crown and ended up as political refugees*. Including a few of my ancestors. ;-) So, viewpoint, always.
*Yes the United Empire Loyalists were political refugees. The term just hadn't been invented yet.
Political refugees that were violently persecuted. Tarred and feathered? The self-described 'patriots' did that to crown royalists, coupled with physical beatings, robbery, public humiliation and threats on one's life and their family's lives. All things one *should* go to jail for in a society governed by rule of law.
Come to think of it, it's eerily similar to what was done to many people of color during the Jim Crow era decades later, and repeated on the LGBTQ community.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 21, 2021, 03:58:21 PM
It's all viewpoint.
When an American says "patriot" in terms of their rebellion, I think "traitor". The "patriots" were the ones who stayed loyal to the Crown and ended up as political refugees*. Including a few of my ancestors. ;-) So, viewpoint, always.
*Yes the United Empire Loyalists were political refugees. The term just hadn't been invented yet.
Political refugees that were violently persecuted. Tarred and feathered? The self-described 'patriots' did that to crown royalists, coupled with physical beatings, robbery, public humiliation and threats on one's life and their family's lives. All things one *should* go to jail for in a society governed by rule of law.
Come to think of it, it's eerily similar to what was done to many people of color during the Jim Crow era decades later, and repeated on the LGBTQ community.
You left out confiscation of property. ;-) Set a precedent (think Japanese in California in WWII).
It's a big part of Canadian history of the time. The coastal Loyalists got relocated by ship, that was the origin of our province of New Brunswick, plus I think many went to Bermuda and the Bahamas? The inland people walked to Quebec and Ontario, which is why there is an English enclave, the Eastern Townships, in Quebec. Laura Secord's family were UELs. And then they had American officers quartered on them in the War of 1812-1814. The irony. I wonder how many of the colonials attached to the British forces that burned parts of Washington (including the White House) had parents who had had to flee. Probably some payback there.
Oops, we weren't supposed to get political. Oh well, maybe some Americans learned a bit of history here.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on April 22, 2021, 06:37:10 PM
Post by: nereo on April 22, 2021, 06:48:15 PM
Honestly, when someone’s starts a statement with, “Honestly,” doesn’t it make you wonder if they’re lying to you the rest of the time?
Yes! Or wait... no... or.... ARGGGG!!!
Post by: Travis on April 22, 2021, 08:57:17 PM
Honestly, when someone’s starts a statement with, “Honestly,” doesn’t it make you wonder if they’re lying to you the rest of the time?
Whenever someone starts with "I'm going to be honest with you..." I always interrupt and say "you better" or "you weren't earlier?"
Post by: shelivesthedream on April 23, 2021, 11:56:05 AM
Honestly, when someone’s starts a statement with, “Honestly,” doesn’t it make you wonder if they’re lying to you the rest of the time?
Whenever someone starts with "I'm going to be honest with you..." I always interrupt and say "you better" or "you weren't earlier?"
What do people reply to that?
Post by: Travis on April 23, 2021, 07:19:59 PM
Honestly, when someone’s starts a statement with, “Honestly,” doesn’t it make you wonder if they’re lying to you the rest of the time?
Whenever someone starts with "I'm going to be honest with you..." I always interrupt and say "you better" or "you weren't earlier?"
What do people reply to that?
Briefly stare at me for being a smartass and interrupting them, then continuing with what they were going to say. Once in a while I get a genuine laugh for pointing out their grammatical faux pas.
Post by: sui generis on April 23, 2021, 09:35:14 PM
Honestly, when someone’s starts a statement with, “Honestly,” doesn’t it make you wonder if they’re lying to you the rest of the time?
Whenever someone starts with "I'm going to be honest with you..." I always interrupt and say "you better" or "you weren't earlier?"
What do people reply to that?
Briefly stare at me for being a smartass and interrupting them, then continuing with what they were going to say. Once in a while I get a genuine laugh for pointing out their grammatical faux pas.
I hate to be a wet blanket, but I really don't think this is a grammatical faux pas. Or well...I guess I can't speak to everyone's use of it, but there is a very valid use that I typically see people employing. It's not about *when* they are being honest with you or not, but *about what* topics they are being honest. "Honestly" or "not gonna lie" or similar are supposed to be used when someone talks about something that one might normally fudge on or present themselves in a better light about. But you! You are a person they are "not gonna lie" to and you are so esteemed in their eyes that they are going to tell you "honestly" what they did or how they feel or something like that, even though if they were speaking with someone they are less close to or less admiring of, they would not be so blunt or vulnerable about the truth of this particular situation.
It definitely has a super valid use to build a better rapport or indicate trust....it may be overused with some, but I usually think the people I speak with are using it appropriately, at least.
Post by: Metalcat on April 23, 2021, 09:53:55 PM
Honestly, when someone’s starts a statement with, “Honestly,” doesn’t it make you wonder if they’re lying to you the rest of the time?
Whenever someone starts with "I'm going to be honest with you..." I always interrupt and say "you better" or "you weren't earlier?"
What do people reply to that?
Briefly stare at me for being a smartass and interrupting them, then continuing with what they were going to say. Once in a while I get a genuine laugh for pointing out their grammatical faux pas.
I hate to be a wet blanket, but I really don't think this is a grammatical faux pas. Or well...I guess I can't speak to everyone's use of it, but there is a very valid use that I typically see people employing. It's not about *when* they are being honest with you or not, but *about what* topics they are being honest. "Honestly" or "not gonna lie" or similar are supposed to be used when someone talks about something that one might normally fudge on or present themselves in a better light about. But you! You are a person they are "not gonna lie" to and you are so esteemed in their eyes that they are going to tell you "honestly" what they did or how they feel or something like that, even though if they were speaking with someone they are less close to or less admiring of, they would not be so blunt or vulnerable about the truth of this particular situation.
It definitely has a super valid use to build a better rapport or indicate trust....it may be overused with some, but I usually think the people I speak with are using it appropriately, at least.
I agree. People lie or withhold information constantly for the sake of social nicety. It's not a grammatical error to emphasize that you are specifically not sugar coating or modulating content due to social expectations.
That said, although it's not a grammatical error, it doesn't necessarily correlate with people telling the truth. What it usually means is that they would like to emphasize the veracity of their next statement, whether it be truthful or not.
I pay close attention to what follows "honestly" because it provides a lot of insight as to what things the person would like me to believe.
"Honestly, I don't care what Ken says about me" is very different than "I don't care what Ken says about me". If it's true that I don't care about Ken's gossip, then the first statement says "I really want *you* to know I don't care", the second statement could mean "I don't care about what Ken says or what you think about it".
So it's not a grammatical error, nor is it useless, it just doesn't mean what it appears to mean on the face of it...y'know, like most shit people say.
Post by: lollylegs on April 25, 2021, 12:11:49 AM
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on April 25, 2021, 06:16:22 AM
Post by: Metalcat on April 25, 2021, 09:36:30 AM
It's annoying, full stop.
Okay, that was really funny.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on April 25, 2021, 09:50:28 AM
It's annoying, full stop.
Mic drop...
Post by: Paul der Krake on April 25, 2021, 10:33:41 AM
“In the midst of a global pandemic”STFU WE STILL KNOW
WE KNOW.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on April 25, 2021, 10:49:39 AM
"Out of an abundance of caution"
This, I now understand, is how people are now saying "yes, we are overreacting, but we don't want to admit it"
Post by: nereo on April 25, 2021, 12:38:01 PM
Here's one that's sticking in my craw:
"Out of an abundance of caution"
This, I now understand, is how people are now saying "yes, we are overreacting, but we don't want to admit it"
Makes me want to describe my youth as: "out of a scarcity of caution, I ...[insert dumb thing i did]."
Post by: Metalcat on April 25, 2021, 01:03:09 PM
Here's one that's sticking in my craw:
"Out of an abundance of caution"
This, I now understand, is how people are now saying "yes, we are overreacting, but we don't want to admit it"
Makes me want to describe my youth as: "out of a scarcity of caution, I ...[insert dumb thing i did]."
I think you should.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on April 25, 2021, 01:27:35 PM
Here's one that's sticking in my craw:
"Out of an abundance of caution"
This, I now understand, is how people are now saying "yes, we are overreacting, but we don't want to admit it"
Makes me want to describe my youth as: "out of a scarcity of caution, I ...[insert dumb thing i did]."
I think you should.
And Darwin Award winners get to be described as "out of an extreme scarcity of caution" . . . ;-)
Post by: Metalcat on April 25, 2021, 03:35:25 PM
Here's one that's sticking in my craw:
"Out of an abundance of caution"
This, I now understand, is how people are now saying "yes, we are overreacting, but we don't want to admit it"
Makes me want to describe my youth as: "out of a scarcity of caution, I ...[insert dumb thing i did]."
I think you should.
And Darwin Award winners get to be described as "out of an extreme scarcity of caution" . . . ;-)
I often use the phrase "due to a insufficient survival instincts..."
Post by: solon on April 26, 2021, 11:25:56 AM
It's annoying, full stop.
Okay, that was really funny.
What's really annoying is when someone says "period" or "full stop" and then keeps going! The whole point is that nothing else needs to be said, the original statement is emphatic enough on its own.
Post by: GreenSheep on April 27, 2021, 05:26:39 AM
Post by: Kris on April 27, 2021, 05:58:47 AM
"Jab," referring to a Covid vaccine. It seems like one person started it somewhere, just to say something different from "vaccine" or "shot," and now everyone and their grandmother is talking about "getting the jab." It's a stupid word.
It’s the common British word for “shot.” In that way, I guess it’s no different or no more stupid than shot.
Maybe it has been catching on in the US lately? I dunno.
Post by: Metalcat on April 27, 2021, 07:03:17 AM
"Jab," referring to a Covid vaccine. It seems like one person started it somewhere, just to say something different from "vaccine" or "shot," and now everyone and their grandmother is talking about "getting the jab." It's a stupid word.
It’s the common British word for “shot.” In that way, I guess it’s no different or no more stupid than shot.
Maybe it has been catching on in the US lately? I dunno.
Yeah "jab" for vaccines has been around for a very long time in many parts of the world. I think that's why it's catching on in North America now, because covid is a global thing.
Post by: Jenny Wren on April 27, 2021, 07:28:11 AM
"Jab," referring to a Covid vaccine. It seems like one person started it somewhere, just to say something different from "vaccine" or "shot," and now everyone and their grandmother is talking about "getting the jab." It's a stupid word.
I take umbrage with this one! (Okay, not really :) It's been called a jab since I was a kid in Texas in the 1980s. I had to get weekly allergy injections for nearly 2 years, and it was always referred to as my "jab." Could it be a regional thing that's caught on? Makes more sense to me than shot -- no one is firing a projectile weapon into my arm, they are jabbing a needle in.
Post by: shelivesthedream on April 27, 2021, 09:56:29 AM
Post by: SunnyDays on April 27, 2021, 10:07:16 AM
"Jab," referring to a Covid vaccine. It seems like one person started it somewhere, just to say something different from "vaccine" or "shot," and now everyone and their grandmother is talking about "getting the jab." It's a stupid word.
I take umbrage with this one! (Okay, not really :) It's been called a jab since I was a kid in Texas in the 1980s. I had to get weekly allergy injections for nearly 2 years, and it was always referred to as my "jab." Could it be a regional thing that's caught on? Makes more sense to me than shot -- no one is firing a projectile weapon into my arm, they are jabbing a needle in.
I see it the other way around. You're not just getting a needle jabbed into you, you are getting fluid shot through the needle!
Post by: Roadrunner53 on April 27, 2021, 10:59:37 AM
I'm British. I've never heard "shot" used in my life except on American TV. Also, "vaccine" is very recent in everyday lexicon. When I were young and no one was on my lawn, the alternative to "jab" was "vaccination". Still used at the GP: "Has she had her three month vaccinations yet?"
Shot has been around a long time, over 100 years: What is the meaning of the phrase 'a shot in the arm'?
A shot in the arm is a metaphor that refers to the rejuvenating effect from an injection of vitamins, narcotics or other drugs, first used in America around 1916. Today, the American idiom a shot in the arm is increasingly used around the world.
Post by: Kris on April 27, 2021, 12:01:20 PM
I'm British. I've never heard "shot" used in my life except on American TV. Also, "vaccine" is very recent in everyday lexicon. When I were young and no one was on my lawn, the alternative to "jab" was "vaccination". Still used at the GP: "Has she had her three month vaccinations yet?"
Shot has been around a long time, over 100 years: What is the meaning of the phrase 'a shot in the arm'?
A shot in the arm is a metaphor that refers to the rejuvenating effect from an injection of vitamins, narcotics or other drugs, first used in America around 1916. Today, the American idiom a shot in the arm is increasingly used around the world.
This may be an instance of the original meaning of a saying being obscured over time, though. I’m American, and I’ve always assumed a shot in the arm referred to a punch, like from someone’s fist.
Post by: nessness on April 27, 2021, 12:42:59 PM
That doesn't make sense though. The expression refers to reviving something that is dying. How would punching someone do that?I'm British. I've never heard "shot" used in my life except on American TV. Also, "vaccine" is very recent in everyday lexicon. When I were young and no one was on my lawn, the alternative to "jab" was "vaccination". Still used at the GP: "Has she had her three month vaccinations yet?"
Shot has been around a long time, over 100 years: What is the meaning of the phrase 'a shot in the arm'?
A shot in the arm is a metaphor that refers to the rejuvenating effect from an injection of vitamins, narcotics or other drugs, first used in America around 1916. Today, the American idiom a shot in the arm is increasingly used around the world.
This may be an instance of the original meaning of a saying being obscured over time, though. I’m American, and I’ve always assumed a shot in the arm referred to a punch, like from someone’s fist.
Post by: Kris on April 27, 2021, 12:45:05 PM
That doesn't make sense though. The expression refers to reviving something that is dying. How would punching someone do that?I'm British. I've never heard "shot" used in my life except on American TV. Also, "vaccine" is very recent in everyday lexicon. When I were young and no one was on my lawn, the alternative to "jab" was "vaccination". Still used at the GP: "Has she had her three month vaccinations yet?"
Shot has been around a long time, over 100 years: What is the meaning of the phrase 'a shot in the arm'?
A shot in the arm is a metaphor that refers to the rejuvenating effect from an injection of vitamins, narcotics or other drugs, first used in America around 1916. Today, the American idiom a shot in the arm is increasingly used around the world.
This may be an instance of the original meaning of a saying being obscured over time, though. I’m American, and I’ve always assumed a shot in the arm referred to a punch, like from someone’s fist.
I’ve never heard it except as giving someONE with flagging energy renewed motivation. Giving them a punch in the arm to wake them up/get them moving is how I see it.
Post by: Jenny Wren on April 27, 2021, 12:46:45 PM
I'm British. I've never heard "shot" used in my life except on American TV. Also, "vaccine" is very recent in everyday lexicon. When I were young and no one was on my lawn, the alternative to "jab" was "vaccination". Still used at the GP: "Has she had her three month vaccinations yet?"
Shot has been around a long time, over 100 years: What is the meaning of the phrase 'a shot in the arm'?
A shot in the arm is a metaphor that refers to the rejuvenating effect from an injection of vitamins, narcotics or other drugs, first used in America around 1916. Today, the American idiom a shot in the arm is increasingly used around the world.
This may be an instance of the original meaning of a saying being obscured over time, though. I’m American, and I’ve always assumed a shot in the arm referred to a punch, like from someone’s fist.
Same, although to be fair the only person I remember using the phrase with any regularity was my dad (born in '43), never anyone in my own peer group nor anyone from the originating generation. RR53's explanation makes a ton of sense, but I think it changed over time. My dad always used it when something surprising went wrong. Like putting a new battery in a car only to discover the alternator was actually bad. It was used like "ain't that just a hoof to the head." (A favorite phrase of my grandmother's.)
Post by: BlueHouse on April 27, 2021, 04:55:33 PM
As an American, I've been used to using the term "shot", but after seeing "Jab" used so often in Britain, I started liking that better, mainly because of how many mass shootings have been happening in the US during the time when I was signing up for my vaccines. I just didn't want to associate my vaccination (happy event) with murders of so many people. I don't know if that makes any sense at all, but to me it did.I'm British. I've never heard "shot" used in my life except on American TV. Also, "vaccine" is very recent in everyday lexicon. When I were young and no one was on my lawn, the alternative to "jab" was "vaccination". Still used at the GP: "Has she had her three month vaccinations yet?"
Shot has been around a long time, over 100 years: What is the meaning of the phrase 'a shot in the arm'?
A shot in the arm is a metaphor that refers to the rejuvenating effect from an injection of vitamins, narcotics or other drugs, first used in America around 1916. Today, the American idiom a shot in the arm is increasingly used around the world.
This may be an instance of the original meaning of a saying being obscured over time, though. I’m American, and I’ve always assumed a shot in the arm referred to a punch, like from someone’s fist.
Same, although to be fair the only person I remember using the phrase with any regularity was my dad (born in '43), never anyone in my own peer group nor anyone from the originating generation. RR53's explanation makes a ton of sense, but I think it changed over time. My dad always used it when something surprising went wrong. Like putting a new battery in a car only to discover the alternator was actually bad. It was used like "ain't that just a hoof to the head." (A favorite phrase of my grandmother's.)
Post by: Morning Glory on April 27, 2021, 05:04:22 PM
As an American, I've been used to using the term "shot", but after seeing "Jab" used so often in Britain, I started liking that better, mainly because of how many mass shootings have been happening in the US during the time when I was signing up for my vaccines. I just didn't want to associate my vaccination (happy event) with murders of so many people. I don't know if that makes any sense at all, but to me it did.I'm British. I've never heard "shot" used in my life except on American TV. Also, "vaccine" is very recent in everyday lexicon. When I were young and no one was on my lawn, the alternative to "jab" was "vaccination". Still used at the GP: "Has she had her three month vaccinations yet?"
Shot has been around a long time, over 100 years: What is the meaning of the phrase 'a shot in the arm'?
A shot in the arm is a metaphor that refers to the rejuvenating effect from an injection of vitamins, narcotics or other drugs, first used in America around 1916. Today, the American idiom a shot in the arm is increasingly used around the world.
This may be an instance of the original meaning of a saying being obscured over time, though. I’m American, and I’ve always assumed a shot in the arm referred to a punch, like from someone’s fist.
Same, although to be fair the only person I remember using the phrase with any regularity was my dad (born in '43), never anyone in my own peer group nor anyone from the originating generation. RR53's explanation makes a ton of sense, but I think it changed over time. My dad always used it when something surprising went wrong. Like putting a new battery in a car only to discover the alternator was actually bad. It was used like "ain't that just a hoof to the head." (A favorite phrase of my grandmother's.)
It makes sense. Heroin users "shooting up" comes from the same metaphor. They call it a "poke" here in the midwest sometimes. As in "Can you get the labs while you start the IV to save them a poke?"
Post by: Travis on April 27, 2021, 06:36:07 PM
As an American, I've been used to using the term "shot", but after seeing "Jab" used so often in Britain, I started liking that better, mainly because of how many mass shootings have been happening in the US during the time when I was signing up for my vaccines. I just didn't want to associate my vaccination (happy event) with murders of so many people. I don't know if that makes any sense at all, but to me it did.I'm British. I've never heard "shot" used in my life except on American TV. Also, "vaccine" is very recent in everyday lexicon. When I were young and no one was on my lawn, the alternative to "jab" was "vaccination". Still used at the GP: "Has she had her three month vaccinations yet?"
Shot has been around a long time, over 100 years: What is the meaning of the phrase 'a shot in the arm'?
A shot in the arm is a metaphor that refers to the rejuvenating effect from an injection of vitamins, narcotics or other drugs, first used in America around 1916. Today, the American idiom a shot in the arm is increasingly used around the world.
This may be an instance of the original meaning of a saying being obscured over time, though. I’m American, and I’ve always assumed a shot in the arm referred to a punch, like from someone’s fist.
Same, although to be fair the only person I remember using the phrase with any regularity was my dad (born in '43), never anyone in my own peer group nor anyone from the originating generation. RR53's explanation makes a ton of sense, but I think it changed over time. My dad always used it when something surprising went wrong. Like putting a new battery in a car only to discover the alternator was actually bad. It was used like "ain't that just a hoof to the head." (A favorite phrase of my grandmother's.)
In the US Army, anything involving a needle is called "getting stuck" whether it's receiving an IV, vaccine, or getting blood drawn.
Post by: nereo on April 27, 2021, 06:52:30 PM
(I’ll show myself out)
Post by: Dicey on April 27, 2021, 07:44:12 PM
And then there’s “getting stuck in the US Army”!Or getting stuck by the US Army.
(I’ll show myself out)
(I'm right behind you.)
Post by: Travis on April 27, 2021, 09:31:07 PM
And then there’s “getting stuck in the US Army”!Or getting stuck by the US Army.
(I’ll show myself out)
(I'm right behind you.)
Usually described using a much more colorful choice of phrases.
Post by: shelivesthedream on April 28, 2021, 04:52:54 AM
I'm British. I've never heard "shot" used in my life except on American TV. Also, "vaccine" is very recent in everyday lexicon. When I were young and no one was on my lawn, the alternative to "jab" was "vaccination". Still used at the GP: "Has she had her three month vaccinations yet?"
Shot has been around a long time, over 100 years: What is the meaning of the phrase 'a shot in the arm'?
A shot in the arm is a metaphor that refers to the rejuvenating effect from an injection of vitamins, narcotics or other drugs, first used in America around 1916. Today, the American idiom a shot in the arm is increasingly used around the world.
So what? I said I'd only heard shot on American TV. Your quote says it's an American word. So we agree?
Post by: Samuel on April 28, 2021, 10:50:29 AM
And I always assumed a "shot in the arm" involved needles.
Perhaps the "shot" and "jab" folks can compromise and we can just go with "stab". Has the advantage of being more accurate but somehow I doubt it'll catch on...
Post by: Jenny Wren on April 28, 2021, 11:07:01 AM
Post by: Taran Wanderer on April 28, 2021, 02:02:11 PM
Post by: GuitarStv on April 28, 2021, 02:08:36 PM
I got my second Moderna shot today. I was talking with an Army vet who was describing getting his shots in the service - needleless, 2400 psi “shot” in each arm. He said it was important to relax and sit very still because if he twitched, the 2400 psi liquid stream would cut a gash in his deltoid. Maybe this is where the term “shot” comes from.
The military uses hyposprays???
Post by: shelivesthedream on April 28, 2021, 02:51:46 PM
I got my second Moderna shot today. I was talking with an Army vet who was describing getting his shots in the service - needleless, 2400 psi “shot” in each arm. He said it was important to relax and sit very still because if he twitched, the 2400 psi liquid stream would cut a gash in his deltoid. Maybe this is where the term “shot” comes from.
What?! I can't be imagining the right thing. In my mind, this looks like a machine firing a "bullet" of liquid at his arm so hard and fast it forced it way under the skin by itself.
Post by: Jenny Wren on April 28, 2021, 02:54:14 PM
I got my second Moderna shot today. I was talking with an Army vet who was describing getting his shots in the service - needleless, 2400 psi “shot” in each arm. He said it was important to relax and sit very still because if he twitched, the 2400 psi liquid stream would cut a gash in his deltoid. Maybe this is where the term “shot” comes from.
What?! I can't be imagining the right thing. In my mind, this looks like a machine firing a "bullet" of liquid at his arm so hard and fast it forced it way under the skin by itself.
That's more or less what it is. Look up "Jet Injection." I believe even the military has phased out their use. Absolutely horrifying!
Post by: simonsez on April 28, 2021, 05:36:14 PM
E.g. "Johnson's play off the bench has been a shot in the arm for this team who looked like they might be in trouble for a split second after Harris got his 3rd foul of the first half. Johnson has been just what the doctor ordered!"
Or for just 'shot' itself, from Seinfeld when an exuberant George compares the taste of a mango to that of a B12 shot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp4YpEShSKY
That stuff about the 2400 psi though, ha wow. I think that's already more than enough to clean shit off a driveway let alone human skin.
Post by: nessness on April 28, 2021, 06:47:10 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/jet-injectors/2021/02/02/23f3b8b0-6578-11eb-886d-5264d4ceb46d_story.html
Post by: GreenSheep on April 28, 2021, 07:28:22 PM
https://jtip.com/what-is-jtip/
Also, I almost forgot about the use of the word "jab" as in "taking a jab at someone," meaning insulting them or making fun of them. Maybe that's only an American use?
Post by: sui generis on April 28, 2021, 09:54:59 PM
Also, I almost forgot about the use of the word "jab" as in "taking a jab at someone," meaning insulting them or making fun of them. Maybe that's only an American use?
I assumed that jab was in reference to the boxing move. Though I guess I'm unsure how much the boxing jab is related to the vaccination jab in origins. They seem obviously related but not sure if they are single-source.
Post by: Metalcat on April 29, 2021, 06:46:31 AM
Also, I almost forgot about the use of the word "jab" as in "taking a jab at someone," meaning insulting them or making fun of them. Maybe that's only an American use?
I assumed that jab was in reference to the boxing move. Though I guess I'm unsure how much the boxing jab is related to the vaccination jab in origins. They seem obviously related but not sure if they are single-source.
Etymology Online says:
jab (v.)
1813, "to thrust or strike with a point," a Scottish variant of job "to strike, pierce, thrust," from Middle English jobben "to jab, thrust, peck" (c. 1500), a word of unknown origin, perhaps imitative. Related: Jabbed; jabbing.
So that's why it's used to describe a needle, or a sharp punch in boxing, or a sharp insult.
Post by: dignam on April 29, 2021, 07:12:27 AM
Post by: sui generis on April 29, 2021, 07:22:38 AM
Not to get too off topic, but when I hear someone "jabbing" someone, I equate it to harmless poking fun/ribbing (gosh, so many English expressions here). Not necessarily an insult.
I think this is again related to boxing. A jab is less powerful or damaging than, say, an uppercut.
Post by: dignam on April 29, 2021, 07:38:49 AM
Not to get too off topic, but when I hear someone "jabbing" someone, I equate it to harmless poking fun/ribbing (gosh, so many English expressions here). Not necessarily an insult.
I think this is again related to boxing. A jab is less powerful or damaging than, say, an uppercut.
That's how I see it as well.
Post by: Metalcat on April 29, 2021, 08:46:12 AM
Not to get too off topic, but when I hear someone "jabbing" someone, I equate it to harmless poking fun/ribbing (gosh, so many English expressions here). Not necessarily an insult.
I think this is again related to boxing. A jab is less powerful or damaging than, say, an uppercut.
That's how I see it as well.
It's possible, or both could come from a common linguistic source. I can't find anything clear online that says that the concept of a jab/insult comes specifically from the boxing version of "jab" and not one of the multiple other versions of "jab" that all seem to come from the Scottish source word cited above.
We also have the language "a pointed comment", which is basically the same thing as a "jab", so that suggests it could have more to do with the concept of a point, and not necessarily a punch, but that's all conjecture.
Post by: sui generis on April 29, 2021, 09:08:47 AM
Not to get too off topic, but when I hear someone "jabbing" someone, I equate it to harmless poking fun/ribbing (gosh, so many English expressions here). Not necessarily an insult.
I think this is again related to boxing. A jab is less powerful or damaging than, say, an uppercut.
That's how I see it as well.
It's possible, or both could come from a common linguistic source. I can't find anything clear online that says that the concept of a jab/insult comes specifically from the boxing version of "jab" and not one of the multiple other versions of "jab" that all seem to come from the Scottish source word cited above.
We also have the language "a pointed comment", which is basically the same thing as a "jab", so that suggests it could have more to do with the concept of a point, and not necessarily a punch, but that's all conjecture.
I think both could be true here. The common historical source, yes. But that this comment about a "jab" being a "lighter" or less harmful version of an insult is, I'm guessing, derived downstream of the common historical source. And from boxing because it has that same relativity concept. That there's a more painful version of a jab in boxing as well as in rhetoric/conversation.
Post by: Metalcat on April 29, 2021, 11:13:00 AM
Not to get too off topic, but when I hear someone "jabbing" someone, I equate it to harmless poking fun/ribbing (gosh, so many English expressions here). Not necessarily an insult.
I think this is again related to boxing. A jab is less powerful or damaging than, say, an uppercut.
That's how I see it as well.
It's possible, or both could come from a common linguistic source. I can't find anything clear online that says that the concept of a jab/insult comes specifically from the boxing version of "jab" and not one of the multiple other versions of "jab" that all seem to come from the Scottish source word cited above.
We also have the language "a pointed comment", which is basically the same thing as a "jab", so that suggests it could have more to do with the concept of a point, and not necessarily a punch, but that's all conjecture.
I think both could be true here. The common historical source, yes. But that this comment about a "jab" being a "lighter" or less harmful version of an insult is, I'm guessing, derived downstream of the common historical source. And from boxing because it has that same relativity concept. That there's a more painful version of a jab in boxing as well as in rhetoric/conversation.
I don't disagree, it could. I'm just offering a different possibility, because after years of studying linguistics, I learned not to assume things just because they seem to make sense.
Post by: nereo on April 30, 2021, 05:24:46 AM
Not to get too off topic, but when I hear someone "jabbing" someone, I equate it to harmless poking fun/ribbing (gosh, so many English expressions here). Not necessarily an insult.
I think this is again related to boxing. A jab is less powerful or damaging than, say, an uppercut.
Or getting shot.
The boxer took a jab in the chest. The boxer was shot in the chest. Only one of those sounds like he might be in mortal peril.
;-)
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 04, 2021, 12:00:07 PM
Balling my eyes out (which makes no sense, but is what was written)
versus
Bawling my eyes out which makes perfect sense.
Auto-correct has a lot to answer for. It causes almost all of my non-sense mistakes. The typos are mine, I do a lot of proof-reading.
Post by: Metalcat on May 04, 2021, 12:04:22 PM
Could be a spelling mistake, but I think not:
Balling my eyes out (which makes no sense, but is what was written)
versus
Bawling my eyes out which makes perfect sense.
Auto-correct has a lot to answer for. It causes almost all of my non-sense mistakes. The typos are mine, I do a lot of proof-reading.
Oh my god spell check is killing me these days. I got a new phone and it's changing things so randomly, I'm seeing all sorts of bizarre substitutions that make absolutely no sense.
It wasn't this bad on my old phone.
Post by: Dollar Slice on May 04, 2021, 12:24:52 PM
Oh my god spell check is killing me these days. I got a new phone and it's changing things so randomly, I'm seeing all sorts of bizarre substitutions that make absolutely no sense.
I just wish my phone would figure out, through context clues or maybe GPS, that I live in Manhattan and not Maharashtra, which is a word it regularly substitutes for me.
Post by: DadJokes on May 04, 2021, 01:30:30 PM
Unfortunately, my fat fingers are completely incapable of typing i, o, or u on my phone without accidentally hitting one of the others. However, I'll take accidentally typing "ine" when I meant to type "one" any day over the myriad of ways that autocorrect would screw up my messages.
Post by: BlueHouse on May 05, 2021, 08:46:43 AM
https://www.hillrag.com/2021/05/04/ouch-a-shot-across-the-verbal-bows/
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 05, 2021, 09:54:43 AM
I'm never posting on this thread again (don't hold me to that). I just read THIS and don't want to turn into her.
https://www.hillrag.com/2021/05/04/ouch-a-shot-across-the-verbal-bows/
We use this thread to vent so we don't drive everyone around us crazy (except for those of us who have to proof-read for jobs).
If everyone would follow the advice I used to give my students (proofread 4 times: for spelling, for grammar, for content, for flow) we would not need this thread.
Of course not much would be posted; everyone would be too busy proof-reading. ;-)
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on May 05, 2021, 09:59:43 AM
One thing that annoys me is when people mix up tenses or don't use parallel construction in clauses. "By this time tomorrow we have succeeded." (We will have succeeded) - "The best part of retiring early is doing good for the community, and also have lots of free time" - (Having lots of free time)
Post by: Morning Glory on May 05, 2021, 10:10:23 AM
I hate the term "nest egg." I don't have a good reason for hating it, other than it always sounds a bit smug and it's hard to pronounce without slurring.
Post by: nereo on May 05, 2021, 10:48:13 AM
"It was found out that..." or "It was determined that..."
Oy! Just strike those first five words and the sentence would likely be better. Instead of "It was found out that plants in the control group had lower mortality", just say "plants in the control group had lower mortality"! The latter is a much better sentence!
Post by: Metalcat on May 05, 2021, 11:30:55 AM
I agree with Bloop for once. That is sloppy writing.
I hate the term "nest egg." I don't have a good reason for hating it, other than it always sounds a bit smug and it's hard to pronounce without slurring.
It's just a fucking weird imagery for savings.
I mean, I get it. You need a small but critical mass of savings to really get the ball rolling on growing your net worth, so it's like the real or fake egg you put in a chicken's nest to trigger them to lay more, but man...that's a long way to go for an awkward metaphor, and yet it's the only one we have for that exact stage of savings.
That, and almost no one actually knows what a damn "nest egg" actually is, so that makes it even more silly.
Post by: nereo on May 05, 2021, 11:35:30 AM
I had no idea...
Post by: Morning Glory on May 05, 2021, 11:47:40 AM
I agree with Bloop for once. That is sloppy writing.
I hate the term "nest egg." I don't have a good reason for hating it, other than it always sounds a bit smug and it's hard to pronounce without slurring.
It's just a fucking weird imagery for savings.
I mean, I get it. You need a small but critical mass of savings to really get the ball rolling on growing your net worth, so it's like the real or fake egg you put in a chicken's nest to trigger them to lay more, but man...that's a long way to go for an awkward metaphor, and yet it's the only one we have for that exact stage of savings.
That, and almost no one actually knows what a damn "nest egg" actually is, so that makes it even more silly.
So "nest egg" isn't even an appropriate term for ten million dollars?? I have only seen it used when people have way more than what they need to get the ball rolling. I think that's why I hate it. It's humble-bragging.
Does that actually make the chickens lay more eggs? I thought if you didn't take the eggs away they would get broody and stop laying.
Post by: Metalcat on May 05, 2021, 12:36:42 PM
I agree with Bloop for once. That is sloppy writing.
I hate the term "nest egg." I don't have a good reason for hating it, other than it always sounds a bit smug and it's hard to pronounce without slurring.
It's just a fucking weird imagery for savings.
I mean, I get it. You need a small but critical mass of savings to really get the ball rolling on growing your net worth, so it's like the real or fake egg you put in a chicken's nest to trigger them to lay more, but man...that's a long way to go for an awkward metaphor, and yet it's the only one we have for that exact stage of savings.
That, and almost no one actually knows what a damn "nest egg" actually is, so that makes it even more silly.
So "nest egg" isn't even an appropriate term for ten million dollars?? I have only seen it used when people have way more than what they need to get the ball rolling. I think that's why I hate it. It's humble-bragging.
Does that actually make the chickens lay more eggs? I thought if you didn't take the eggs away they would get broody and stop laying.
Lol, yeah, it shouldn't refer to full retirement savings, just the first big chunk where compounding and momentum really start kicking in. However, since people have no idea what a nest egg is, how are they to know that the way they're using it makes no sense?
And yes, if you put a real or fake egg into a nest, a chicken will lay more eggs in that nest.
Post by: Morning Glory on May 05, 2021, 12:42:16 PM
I agree with Bloop for once. That is sloppy writing.
I hate the term "nest egg." I don't have a good reason for hating it, other than it always sounds a bit smug and it's hard to pronounce without slurring.
It's just a fucking weird imagery for savings.
I mean, I get it. You need a small but critical mass of savings to really get the ball rolling on growing your net worth, so it's like the real or fake egg you put in a chicken's nest to trigger them to lay more, but man...that's a long way to go for an awkward metaphor, and yet it's the only one we have for that exact stage of savings.
That, and almost no one actually knows what a damn "nest egg" actually is, so that makes it even more silly.
So "nest egg" isn't even an appropriate term for ten million dollars?? I have only seen it used when people have way more than what they need to get the ball rolling. I think that's why I hate it. It's humble-bragging.
Does that actually make the chickens lay more eggs? I thought if you didn't take the eggs away they would get broody and stop laying.
Lol, yeah, it shouldn't refer to full retirement savings, just the first big chunk where compounding and momentum really start kicking in. However, since people have no idea what a nest egg is, how are they to know that the way they're using it makes no sense?
And yes, if you put a real or fake egg into a nest, a chicken will lay more eggs in that nest.
Ahh, so it's to tell them where to lay the eggs, not so much to increase production. Now the metaphor really makes no sense. When I had chickens there were four nesting boxes and they always used the same two instead of spreading out. It was funny when they would all try to cram in there. Thank you for explaining that!!!
Post by: Metalcat on May 05, 2021, 12:46:42 PM
I agree with Bloop for once. That is sloppy writing.
I hate the term "nest egg." I don't have a good reason for hating it, other than it always sounds a bit smug and it's hard to pronounce without slurring.
It's just a fucking weird imagery for savings.
I mean, I get it. You need a small but critical mass of savings to really get the ball rolling on growing your net worth, so it's like the real or fake egg you put in a chicken's nest to trigger them to lay more, but man...that's a long way to go for an awkward metaphor, and yet it's the only one we have for that exact stage of savings.
That, and almost no one actually knows what a damn "nest egg" actually is, so that makes it even more silly.
So "nest egg" isn't even an appropriate term for ten million dollars?? I have only seen it used when people have way more than what they need to get the ball rolling. I think that's why I hate it. It's humble-bragging.
Does that actually make the chickens lay more eggs? I thought if you didn't take the eggs away they would get broody and stop laying.
Lol, yeah, it shouldn't refer to full retirement savings, just the first big chunk where compounding and momentum really start kicking in. However, since people have no idea what a nest egg is, how are they to know that the way they're using it makes no sense?
And yes, if you put a real or fake egg into a nest, a chicken will lay more eggs in that nest.
Ahh, so it's to tell them where to lay the eggs, not so much to increase production. Now the metaphor really makes no sense. When I had chickens there were four nesting boxes and they always used the same two instead of spreading out. It was funny when they would all try to cram in there. Thank you for explaining that!!!
Yeah, otherwise they lay them where they want to. It's like pee pads training a puppy.
The metaphor kind of makes sense if you think of the nest as your accounts and you want your nest to get full. But as I said before, it's a bit of a laboured metaphor to begin with. I've never liked it, because how can you ever know that two people mean the same thing, beyond "chunk of money".
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 05, 2021, 07:31:56 PM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on May 05, 2021, 08:28:15 PM
Re nest egg. We have all sorts of sayings where the original usage is gone. Does anyone (but me) know what a tenterhook was?Ooh, that gives me an idea--we should start a new thread for "sayings of which people have forgotten the origin."
Here's one I love: "pulling out all the stops" - refers to basically turning on every single rank of pipes on an organ, for maximum volume. (I love it because I'm an organist, if only a mediocre one)
Post by: Morning Glory on May 05, 2021, 08:38:40 PM
I had to explain "boilerplate" to my husband the other day.
Post by: RWD on May 05, 2021, 08:47:52 PM
Here's one I love: "pulling out all the stops" - refers to basically turning on every single rank of pipes on an organ, for maximum volume. (I love it because I'm an organist, if only a mediocre one)I had no idea, that's so cool!
I always imagine tenterhooks being a cat's claws, although I could be wrong. I picture a cat hanging from a ledge by it's claws when I hear that phrase.I've never looked it up before now. Apparently they are hooked nails used in making wool cloth (hundred of years ago).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenterhook
Post by: Travis on May 05, 2021, 08:50:56 PM
Grammar snipe time
One thing that annoys me is when people mix up tenses or don't use parallel construction in clauses. "By this time tomorrow we have succeeded." (We will have succeeded) - "The best part of retiring early is doing good for the community, and also have lots of free time" - (Having lots of free time)
Am I in the wrong for getting an eye twitch after reading this?
Quote
With the exception to authorizing fully vaccinated individuals the ability to exercise “limited” travel from their approved quarantine location to a USFK duty location for work and/or to engage in on-installation health and safety activities, and a mid-point PCR test, there is no change to USFK’s current mandatory quarantine policy.
Post by: Metalcat on May 05, 2021, 08:56:17 PM
Re nest egg. We have all sorts of sayings where the original usage is gone. Does anyone (but me) know what a tenterhook was?Ooh, that gives me an idea--we should start a new thread for "sayings of which people have forgotten the origin."
Here's one I love: "pulling out all the stops" - refers to basically turning on every single rank of pipes on an organ, for maximum volume. (I love it because I'm an organist, if only a mediocre one)
I knew that one because although I am not an organist, I've spent time with master organ makers.
Also, whenever I write an idiom, I tend to pause and look it up. I don't like not knowing what I'm actually saying, but it's easier to catch in writing.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 06, 2021, 07:28:26 AM
Here's one I love: "pulling out all the stops" - refers to basically turning on every single rank of pipes on an organ, for maximum volume. (I love it because I'm an organist, if only a mediocre one)I had no idea, that's so cool!I always imagine tenterhooks being a cat's claws, although I could be wrong. I picture a cat hanging from a ledge by it's claws when I hear that phrase.I've never looked it up before now. Apparently they are hooked nails used in making wool cloth (hundred of years ago).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenterhook
There are masses of them based on all the stages of cloth making. A historian does an interesting blog, he spent some time looking at historical cloth making:
https://acoup.blog/2021/03/05/collections-clothing-how-did-they-make-it-part-i-high-fiber/ (https://acoup.blog/2021/03/05/collections-clothing-how-did-they-make-it-part-i-high-fiber/)
Post by: BlueHouse on May 06, 2021, 10:08:39 AM
I can't tell you how many millennial-age people repeat this phrase as if it's something they need to actively work on. So they get in the mode of believing that every purchase they make helps them "build credit". I'm of the opinion that I have no need for credit anymore. (or limited need anyway).
Post by: Taran Wanderer on May 06, 2021, 10:31:50 AM
It’s “toe the line” people!
Post by: Jenny Wren on May 06, 2021, 10:35:32 AM
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on May 06, 2021, 11:39:34 AM
Grammar snipe time
One thing that annoys me is when people mix up tenses or don't use parallel construction in clauses. "By this time tomorrow we have succeeded." (We will have succeeded) - "The best part of retiring early is doing good for the community, and also have lots of free time" - (Having lots of free time)
Am I in the wrong for getting an eye twitch after reading this?QuoteWith the exception to authorizing fully vaccinated individuals the ability to exercise “limited” travel from their approved quarantine location to a USFK duty location for work and/or to engage in on-installation health and safety activities, and a mid-point PCR test, there is no change to USFK’s current mandatory quarantine policy.
Reading that just about killed me. So many little clunky bits to it. Incorrect preposition - use of 'exception to' instead of 'exception of'. Also, to authorise someone 'the ability' to do something is a clunky use of a transitive verb. You authorise Bob to exercise limited travel. You don't normally speak of authorising Bob the ability to exercise limited travel. And of course double negatives abound. Also a dangling phrase "and a mid-point PCR test" where it's completely unclear what that appends to. Just yuck.
People should have learned sentence diagramming! It's so useful for ensuring parallel construction and balanced sentences.
Post by: teen persuasion on May 06, 2021, 12:07:20 PM
Re nest egg. We have all sorts of sayings where the original usage is gone. Does anyone (but me) know what a tenterhook was?
Saving for a rainy day is the phrase that drives me nuts - long ago I ran across it in an OLD novel, and the usage hit me over the head because it made so much more sense than the current usage. The farm worker had been given the rare treat of a magazine to read, but was so busy with farm duties that he had to save it for a rainy day (wait for a day when all outdoor duties were pointless, so had the free time to enjoy reading). Nothing to do with saving money, at all.
Post by: Metalcat on May 06, 2021, 12:13:22 PM
Re nest egg. We have all sorts of sayings where the original usage is gone. Does anyone (but me) know what a tenterhook was?
Saving for a rainy day is the phrase that drives me nuts - long ago I ran across it in an OLD novel, and the usage hit me over the head because it made so much more sense than the current usage. The farm worker had been given the rare treat of a magazine to read, but was so busy with farm duties that he had to save it for a rainy day (wait for a day when all outdoor duties were pointless, so had the free time to enjoy reading). Nothing to do with saving money, at all.
It does if you don't stretch it. Meaning, save it for when it makes most sense. But people equate "rainy day" with "bad day", and then assign meaning that the phrase was never intended to have.
So you can save "save money for a rainy day" and mean that you are saving for an emergency or for an opportunity.
The phrase wouldn't have the connotation it does now had the original phrase been "save it for a snow day" because we still associate snow days with time off.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 06, 2021, 03:41:01 PM
Re nest egg. We have all sorts of sayings where the original usage is gone. Does anyone (but me) know what a tenterhook was?
Saving for a rainy day is the phrase that drives me nuts - long ago I ran across it in an OLD novel, and the usage hit me over the head because it made so much more sense than the current usage. The farm worker had been given the rare treat of a magazine to read, but was so busy with farm duties that he had to save it for a rainy day (wait for a day when all outdoor duties were pointless, so had the free time to enjoy reading). Nothing to do with saving money, at all.
It does if you don't stretch it. Meaning, save it for when it makes most sense. But people equate "rainy day" with "bad day", and then assign meaning that the phrase was never intended to have.
So you can save "save money for a rainy day" and mean that you are saving for an emergency or for an opportunity.
The phrase wouldn't have the connotation it does now had the original phrase been "save it for a snow day" because we still associate snow days with time off.
Winter was the slack season anyway. Relatively speaking.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 06, 2021, 03:42:07 PM
Tow the line...
It’s “toe the line” people!
Unless they are on a footpath towing a boat up a canal. ;-)
Post by: Travis on May 06, 2021, 09:07:19 PM
Grammar snipe time
One thing that annoys me is when people mix up tenses or don't use parallel construction in clauses. "By this time tomorrow we have succeeded." (We will have succeeded) - "The best part of retiring early is doing good for the community, and also have lots of free time" - (Having lots of free time)
Am I in the wrong for getting an eye twitch after reading this?QuoteWith the exception to authorizing fully vaccinated individuals the ability to exercise “limited” travel from their approved quarantine location to a USFK duty location for work and/or to engage in on-installation health and safety activities, and a mid-point PCR test, there is no change to USFK’s current mandatory quarantine policy.
Reading that just about killed me. So many little clunky bits to it. Incorrect preposition - use of 'exception to' instead of 'exception of'. Also, to authorise someone 'the ability' to do something is a clunky use of a transitive verb. You authorise Bob to exercise limited travel. You don't normally speak of authorising Bob the ability to exercise limited travel. And of course double negatives abound. Also a dangling phrase "and a mid-point PCR test" where it's completely unclear what that appends to. Just yuck.
People should have learned sentence diagramming! It's so useful for ensuring parallel construction and balanced sentences.
And it's one of the longest passive voice phrases I've ever read.
Post by: dignam on May 07, 2021, 07:09:44 AM
I learned the phrase comes from the way power was controlled in steam locomotives. Two weighted metal balls in the out position meant power wasn't limited and it was going as fast as possible.
Post by: GuitarStv on May 07, 2021, 07:35:31 AM
One phrase I like that most people use correctly but for the wrong reasons is "going balls out"; to mean giving it maximum effort. I bet people equate it to someone being "ballsy".
I learned the phrase comes from the way power was controlled in steam locomotives. Two weighted metal balls in the out position meant power wasn't limited and it was going as fast as possible.
Huh. I always figured it was more a reference to Flea's stage presence:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/ZO7vMOuQlBjzYJFzbEjX5S_R5vcV_nnwa-nazNkgmpDYkrbtY83DbicQHwxqVBM6xnGa9X6hOKN9ZfFwPqLNTYY_wzn9wI1zGY231C6Yn80n2xGdoCNlKHhuLw)
He is definitely a balls out bassist.
Post by: Metalcat on May 07, 2021, 08:21:37 AM
One phrase I like that most people use correctly but for the wrong reasons is "going balls out"; to mean giving it maximum effort. I bet people equate it to someone being "ballsy".
I learned the phrase comes from the way power was controlled in steam locomotives. Two weighted metal balls in the out position meant power wasn't limited and it was going as fast as possible.
I knew this because growing up a common seasonal job was to work on a tourist steam train.
I also know "balls to the wall" because of the fighter pilots in my family.
Post by: Morning Glory on May 07, 2021, 12:34:52 PM
I heard 'balls to the wall" a lot in my restaurant life, to mean really really busy. I didn't know that it originated with fighter pilots. When I hear it I always think of that old rap song "to the window, to the wall..." and start giggling at the image of a giant set of testicles flopping across the room.
So, if it's balls to the wall at a restaurant you had better go balls out or you will end up "in the weeds". And also please cover your testicles.
Post by: Samuel on May 07, 2021, 01:52:38 PM
Apparently having "brass balls" is related too. Fancier mechanisms would be made of brass instead of more dense steel or iron, meaning the brass balls had to be bigger to create the same centrifugal forces.
Post by: nereo on May 07, 2021, 05:32:06 PM
Used almost always in a negative way to describe government spending on a particular program or outlay.
Post by: Morning Glory on May 07, 2021, 06:51:56 PM
“Government Cheddar”
Used almost always in a negative way to describe government spending on a particular program or outlay.
It used to be pork, right? I haven't heard cheddar yet, you must live in Wisconsin. I don't really like most idioms that involve food and money together, except the chicken tax, that one's funny.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax#:~:text=The%20Chicken%20Tax%20is%20a,on%20importation%20of%20U.S.%20chicken.
Post by: nereo on May 07, 2021, 07:08:01 PM
“Government Cheddar”
Used almost always in a negative way to describe government spending on a particular program or outlay.
It used to be pork, right? I haven't heard cheddar yet, you must live in Wisconsin. I don't really like most idioms that involve food and money together, except the chicken tax, that one's funny.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax#:~:text=The%20Chicken%20Tax%20is%20a,on%20importation%20of%20U.S.%20chicken.
Nope, not anywhere near Wisconsin :-)
Thanks for sharing the chicken tax. Always fun to learn something a bit esoteric in history.
Post by: BlueHouse on May 08, 2021, 09:50:26 AM
“Government Cheddar”
Used almost always in a negative way to describe government spending on a particular program or outlay.
It used to be pork, right? I haven't heard cheddar yet, you must live in Wisconsin. I don't really like most idioms that involve food and money together, except the chicken tax, that one's funny.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax#:~:text=The%20Chicken%20Tax%20is%20a,on%20importation%20of%20U.S.%20chicken.
For some reason, I always thought pork was a government program set to benefit specific constituencies, while I've thought of cheddar as meaning to go direct to the people. I have no source for this, so it's likely to be wrong.
Post by: Jenny Wren on May 08, 2021, 10:05:48 AM
For some reason, I always thought pork was a government program set to benefit specific constituencies, while I've thought of cheddar as meaning to go direct to the people. I have no source for this, so it's likely to be wrong.
I think you're right. A bit of searching shows the phrase originates from the government cheese program used to subsidize dairy producers and feed the needy (and the feeding of the poor appears to be an afterthought of the entire program, if I skimmed the Wikipedia entry correctly).
Post by: GreenSheep on May 09, 2021, 05:45:10 AM
I wish there were a thread like this for Spanish. I'm learning Spanish, and it would be great to know what words and phrases are overused or annoying!
Post by: Metalcat on May 09, 2021, 07:30:01 AM
"Source" as a verb. For a company, it doesn't sound too terrible, but for a person, it sounds like a weird way to avoid saying "buy." A restaurant might source their ingredients from various local farmers, but a person making dinner at home buys their tomatoes at the farmers market.
I wish there were a thread like this for Spanish. I'm learning Spanish, and it would be great to know what words and phrases are overused or annoying!
It makes sense because it's a business, and in business sourcing and procurement are separate processes.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on May 09, 2021, 07:59:09 AM
Post by: nereo on May 09, 2021, 10:12:05 AM
Everything about restaurant menus tends to annoy me
huh? What about restaurant menus annoys you? Most seem pretty effective to me — they tell me what they make, what’s in it, what it costs and it tends to be organized in a logical manner.
How should they be different?
Post by: Dicey on May 09, 2021, 10:38:54 AM
Consider the source.Everything about restaurant menus tends to annoy me
huh? What about restaurant menus annoys you? Most seem pretty effective to me — they tell me what they make, what’s in it, what it costs and it tends to be organized in a logical manner.
How should they be different?
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on May 09, 2021, 11:07:33 AM
I mean menus at a certain type of restaurant.
I've got no issue with McDonald's menus.
Post by: nereo on May 09, 2021, 01:00:52 PM
Overblown language and unnecessarily complicated descriptions, mainly.
I mean menus at a certain type of restaurant.
I've got no issue with McDonald's menus.
Can you give an example? Maybe menus tend to be different in Australia.
Now that you bring it up, I’ve found McDonald’s many to be frustrating because it’s all flatscreens now and rolling ads, so as I try to read the menu it suddenly changes. I guess most people who war there just know what they sell, but as it’s really infrequent for us that’s not the case.
Post by: shelivesthedream on May 09, 2021, 01:13:53 PM
I am fun at restaurants.
Post by: Dicey on May 09, 2021, 01:53:59 PM
Overblown language and unnecessarily complicated descriptions, mainly.The prize winner for simplicity in the Western US is In & Out. The menu is very straightforward, but there are ton of insider "secret" options. Animal style, anyone?
I mean menus at a certain type of restaurant.
I've got no issue with McDonald's menus.
https://www.in-n-out.com/menu/not-so-secret-menu
https://www.seriouseats.com/the-in-n-out-survival-guide-we-ate-every-single-item-on-the-secret-menu
Bonus link for any SoCal old-timers:
http://timcastro.blogspot.com/2009/09/in-n-out-thats-what-bumper-sticker-is.html
Post by: Metalcat on May 09, 2021, 02:01:12 PM
Overblown language and unnecessarily complicated descriptions, mainly.
I mean menus at a certain type of restaurant.
I've got no issue with McDonald's menus.
I'm 100% with you, some of the restaurants around here have such absurd descriptions of things, the waiters basically need to translate them into plain language in order to be able to decide.
And I'm a former chef, so it takes a lot to irritate me with culinary language, but many places do.
Post by: Paul der Krake on May 09, 2021, 02:17:05 PM
Sometimes they throw in obscure French words that I, a native speaker, do not know. I'm all for rich and precise language, but come on.
Post by: BlueHouse on May 09, 2021, 03:25:50 PM
Overblown language and unnecessarily complicated descriptions, mainly.
I mean menus at a certain type of restaurant.
I've got no issue with McDonald's menus.
there's a realtor in DC who writes very different listings. Some people love it, others hate it. I don't have much of an opinion on it other than I think it's tiresome to try to read more than one listing of his.
here's an example of one of his listings:
Dream House, truly sublime, narcotic light on a fine timeless finish, hypnotic sights while your mind's eye takes flight into endlessly soaring ceiling heights, skillfully built in 2016, a custom machine outfitted with wings, gently test driven so the part you’ve been given, start living in art on a tree-lined street beneath the shadow of the dome where neighbors still greet, an amazing home, a domestic retreat, so city-central with a little village disposition.
https://realestateindc.com/node/901 (https://realestateindc.com/node/901)
Post by: Metalcat on May 09, 2021, 04:27:55 PM
Overblown language and unnecessarily complicated descriptions, mainly.
I mean menus at a certain type of restaurant.
I've got no issue with McDonald's menus.
there's a realtor in DC who writes very different listings. Some people love it, others hate it. I don't have much of an opinion on it other than I think it's tiresome to try to read more than one listing of his.
here's an example of one of his listings:
Dream House, truly sublime, narcotic light on a fine timeless finish, hypnotic sights while your mind's eye takes flight into endlessly soaring ceiling heights, skillfully built in 2016, a custom machine outfitted with wings, gently test driven so the part you’ve been given, start living in art on a tree-lined street beneath the shadow of the dome where neighbors still greet, an amazing home, a domestic retreat, so city-central with a little village disposition.
https://realestateindc.com/node/901 (https://realestateindc.com/node/901)
Lol, my sister was just hired to write listings for cars as if they were dating profiles.
Post by: Chaplin on May 09, 2021, 04:34:16 PM
Overblown language and unnecessarily complicated descriptions, mainly.
I mean menus at a certain type of restaurant.
I've got no issue with McDonald's menus.
there's a realtor in DC who writes very different listings. Some people love it, others hate it. I don't have much of an opinion on it other than I think it's tiresome to try to read more than one listing of his.
here's an example of one of his listings:
Dream House, truly sublime, narcotic light on a fine timeless finish, hypnotic sights while your mind's eye takes flight into endlessly soaring ceiling heights, skillfully built in 2016, a custom machine outfitted with wings, gently test driven so the part you’ve been given, start living in art on a tree-lined street beneath the shadow of the dome where neighbors still greet, an amazing home, a domestic retreat, so city-central with a little village disposition.
https://realestateindc.com/node/901 (https://realestateindc.com/node/901)
Compared to the listings I see here, that's a breath of fresh air. Here, the ads are so full of grammatical errors, tropes, and words-that-don't-mean-what-they-thought-they-meant that I'm forced to conclude that many realtors ended up in that field because they weren't fit for anything else.
Post by: GreenSheep on May 09, 2021, 04:53:31 PM
Also annoying... anything described as "fresh" at a restaurant. Assuming it's not dehydrated or somehow otherwise preserved for long-term storage... shouldn't "fresh" go without saying?!
Post by: Metalcat on May 09, 2021, 05:05:57 PM
I was once at a restaurant in which the menu noted that a particular dish contained "orchard apples." I know apple trees do exist outside of orchards, say, as a solitary tree in someone's yard, but it's unlikely those apples would end up at a restaurant, so... it's safe to say most restaurant apples come from an orchard. It was just such an obvious attempt to get the reader to imagine an orchard with apples growing on the trees, etc. and make an emotionally-influenced decision to choose that dish -- but provided nothing useful about the flavor or the way the dish was cooked.
Also annoying... anything described as "fresh" at a restaurant. Assuming it's not dehydrated or somehow otherwise preserved for long-term storage... shouldn't "fresh" go without saying?!
Oooh, this reminds me of one of my favourite stories.
I was at an event with a bunch of diplomatic staff, and chatting with one of the douchiest men I've ever met. Anyhoo, he finds out my family is from Denmark and then proceeds to educate me that pickled herring is popular in Denmark (oh wow, I didn't know that about my own culture), but that he only eats it when over there because you just can't get it fresh here.
...Pickled
...Herring
......PICKLED!
Post by: nereo on May 09, 2021, 05:10:45 PM
Maybe it’s being outside a large, hip market, or just the places we tend to frequent (if you can call 1-2x/mo pre-COVID “frequent”) but most menus I’ve encounter are pretty straightforward: name of the dish, followed by a sentence basically listing the major ingredients and preparation style.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on May 09, 2021, 05:18:57 PM
I think Bloop is referring to the menus at the hip restaurants? You know the type. I regularly get dragged to those by She Who Must Be Obeyed.
Sometimes they throw in obscure French words that I, a native speaker, do not know. I'm all for rich and precise language, but come on.
Everything is drenched in jus
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on May 09, 2021, 05:23:20 PM
Overblown language and unnecessarily complicated descriptions, mainly.
I mean menus at a certain type of restaurant.
I've got no issue with McDonald's menus.
there's a realtor in DC who writes very different listings. Some people love it, others hate it. I don't have much of an opinion on it other than I think it's tiresome to try to read more than one listing of his.
here's an example of one of his listings:
Dream House, truly sublime, narcotic light on a fine timeless finish, hypnotic sights while your mind's eye takes flight into endlessly soaring ceiling heights, skillfully built in 2016, a custom machine outfitted with wings, gently test driven so the part you’ve been given, start living in art on a tree-lined street beneath the shadow of the dome where neighbors still greet, an amazing home, a domestic retreat, so city-central with a little village disposition.
https://realestateindc.com/node/901 (https://realestateindc.com/node/901)
Lol, my sister was just hired to write listings for cars as if they were dating profiles.
12 years old, two previous owners, regularly serviced...
Post by: Dollar Slice on May 09, 2021, 05:24:34 PM
I think Bloop is referring to the menus at the hip restaurants? You know the type. I regularly get dragged to those by She Who Must Be Obeyed.
Sometimes they throw in obscure French words that I, a native speaker, do not know. I'm all for rich and precise language, but come on.
Everything is drenched in jus
My family went to a restaurant once (for a birthday or something) where almost every meat dish had "jus" but instead of a French pronunciation, the waitress pronounced it "Jew." My family is Jewish and we had a terrible time keeping a straight face while she recited all the specials. A lamb Jew, a roast beef Jew...
Post by: nereo on May 09, 2021, 05:26:54 PM
I think Bloop is referring to the menus at the hip restaurants? You know the type. I regularly get dragged to those by She Who Must Be Obeyed.
Sometimes they throw in obscure French words that I, a native speaker, do not know. I'm all for rich and precise language, but come on.
Everything is drenched in jus
My family went to a restaurant once (for a birthday or something) where almost every meat dish had "jus" but instead of a French pronunciation, the waitress pronounced it "Jew." My family is Jewish and we had a terrible time keeping a straight face while she recited all the specials. A lamb Jew, a roast beef Jew...
Pork Chop Jew?
Post by: Dollar Slice on May 09, 2021, 05:28:14 PM
I think Bloop is referring to the menus at the hip restaurants? You know the type. I regularly get dragged to those by She Who Must Be Obeyed.
Sometimes they throw in obscure French words that I, a native speaker, do not know. I'm all for rich and precise language, but come on.
Everything is drenched in jus
My family went to a restaurant once (for a birthday or something) where almost every meat dish had "jus" but instead of a French pronunciation, the waitress pronounced it "Jew." My family is Jewish and we had a terrible time keeping a straight face while she recited all the specials. A lamb Jew, a roast beef Jew...
Pork Chop Jew?
Luckily we don't keep kosher.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 09, 2021, 05:32:37 PM
Agneau au jus pour moi, s'il vous plait. Garni avec menthe.
Post by: Paul der Krake on May 09, 2021, 05:33:07 PM
I've trying to get the wife to pronounce "u" the French way (ü) for close to 10 years now. No can. But I'd like to think she'd pronounce it more like "joo", not "jew". I'll have to manufacture a jussy situation to see how she does...I think Bloop is referring to the menus at the hip restaurants? You know the type. I regularly get dragged to those by She Who Must Be Obeyed.
Sometimes they throw in obscure French words that I, a native speaker, do not know. I'm all for rich and precise language, but come on.
Everything is drenched in jus
My family went to a restaurant once (for a birthday or something) where almost every meat dish had "jus" but instead of a French pronunciation, the waitress pronounced it "Jew." My family is Jewish and we had a terrible time keeping a straight face while she recited all the specials. A lamb Jew, a roast beef Jew...
Pork Chop Jew?
Post by: Kris on May 09, 2021, 05:35:25 PM
I've trying to get the wife to pronounce "u" the French way (ü) for close to 10 years now. No can. But I'd like to think she'd pronounce it more like "joo", not "jew". I'll have to manufacture a jussy situation to see how she does...I think Bloop is referring to the menus at the hip restaurants? You know the type. I regularly get dragged to those by She Who Must Be Obeyed.
Sometimes they throw in obscure French words that I, a native speaker, do not know. I'm all for rich and precise language, but come on.
Everything is drenched in jus
My family went to a restaurant once (for a birthday or something) where almost every meat dish had "jus" but instead of a French pronunciation, the waitress pronounced it "Jew." My family is Jewish and we had a terrible time keeping a straight face while she recited all the specials. A lamb Jew, a roast beef Jew...
Pork Chop Jew?
Oh, lord. I was a professor of French for about twenty years in the US, and the struggle is real. Condolences.
Post by: Dollar Slice on May 09, 2021, 05:51:39 PM
I've trying to get the wife to pronounce "u" the French way (ü) for close to 10 years now. No can. But I'd like to think she'd pronounce it more like "joo", not "jew". I'll have to manufacture a jussy situation to see how she does...
It's really the hard 'j' causing the problem in this scenario.
Post by: Kris on May 09, 2021, 05:54:54 PM
I've trying to get the wife to pronounce "u" the French way (ü) for close to 10 years now. No can. But I'd like to think she'd pronounce it more like "joo", not "jew". I'll have to manufacture a jussy situation to see how she does...
It's really the hard 'j' causing the problem in this scenario.
It’s not. Americans can pronounce the soft “zh” just fine. It’s the /y/ versus the /u/ that is the problem. Americans have serious problems with /y/
Post by: Dollar Slice on May 09, 2021, 05:58:42 PM
I've trying to get the wife to pronounce "u" the French way (ü) for close to 10 years now. No can. But I'd like to think she'd pronounce it more like "joo", not "jew". I'll have to manufacture a jussy situation to see how she does...
It's really the hard 'j' causing the problem in this scenario.
It’s not. Americans can pronounce the soft “zh” just fine. It’s the /y/ versus the /u/ that is the problem. Americans have serious problems with /y/
I mean that was the problem in the scenario I described. If they had pronounced it with the incorrect vowel sound, no one would bat an eye. It's because they used the hard J that made it sound insane to us.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on May 09, 2021, 08:19:45 PM
And it's not jus, it's au jus. And the meat should be in French too if you are going to throw in au jus.
Agneau au jus pour moi, s'il vous plait. Garni avec menthe.
I have seen a menu advertising "Beef with au jus" which I think is just an attempt to cause a stroke in grammar pedants like me.
Related to the above post, the soft J, hard J distinction does cause a lot of problems for speakers due to either under correction (like the waitress who pronounced "jus" as Jew) or hyper correction (like newsreaders who pronounce Beijing with a French J...not realising that the Chinese J is the same as the English J...)
Post by: Travis on May 09, 2021, 09:50:03 PM
Also annoying... anything described as "fresh" at a restaurant. Assuming it's not dehydrated or somehow otherwise preserved for long-term storage... shouldn't "fresh" go without saying?!
For very wide definitions of "fresh" up to and including "loaded with salt and reheated from a freezer."
Post by: Dicey on May 09, 2021, 10:36:31 PM
I always understood that to mean not frozen. At least by the time it gets to your table.
Also annoying... anything described as "fresh" at a restaurant. Assuming it's not dehydrated or somehow otherwise preserved for long-term storage... shouldn't "fresh" go without saying?!
For very wide definitions of "fresh" up to and including "loaded with salt and reheated from a freezer."
Post by: shelivesthedream on May 10, 2021, 03:33:27 AM
I was once at a restaurant in which the menu noted that a particular dish contained "orchard apples." I know apple trees do exist outside of orchards, say, as a solitary tree in someone's yard, but it's unlikely those apples would end up at a restaurant, so... it's safe to say most restaurant apples come from an orchard. It was just such an obvious attempt to get the reader to imagine an orchard with apples growing on the trees, etc. and make an emotionally-influenced decision to choose that dish -- but provided nothing useful about the flavor or the way the dish was cooked.
Also annoying... anything described as "fresh" at a restaurant. Assuming it's not dehydrated or somehow otherwise preserved for long-term storage... shouldn't "fresh" go without saying?!
Oh, I love stuff like "orchard apples"! Fantastic entertainment discussing what other kinds of apples there are, or all those river fish that don't live in "freshwater" (as opposed to salty sea water, farmed or not), or all that milk that's full of gluten, or all those potatoes grown somewhere other than fields.
Post by: merula on May 10, 2021, 08:20:04 AM
I have seen a menu advertising "Beef with au jus" which I think is just an attempt to cause a stroke in grammar pedants like me.
Related to the above post, the soft J, hard J distinction does cause a lot of problems for speakers due to either under correction (like the waitress who pronounced "jus" as Jew) or hyper correction (like newsreaders who pronounce Beijing with a French J...not realising that the Chinese J is the same as the English J...)
I've heard the Bei/y/ing thing from Brits, so I think it might be a British "French is fancy and educated", or if the speaker is from the Colonies, further mangled through "British is fancy and educated".
"With au jus" reminded me of visiting the Moorish palace in Granada, Spain. The romanized Arabic name is Al-Ḥamra, "The Red One", which is then rendered in Spanish as "La Alhambra".
And then I overheard some English speakers saying "The la alhambra".
Post by: zolotiyeruki on May 10, 2021, 08:59:13 AM
*snicker* Dangit, man, I'm trying to work in a shared office here!Lol, my sister was just hired to write listings for cars as if they were dating profiles.
12 years old, two previous owners, regularly serviced...
And of course, that only leads to "Hill Hill Hill Hill (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUyXiiIGDTo)".I have seen a menu advertising "Beef with au jus" which I think is just an attempt to cause a stroke in grammar pedants like me.
Related to the above post, the soft J, hard J distinction does cause a lot of problems for speakers due to either under correction (like the waitress who pronounced "jus" as Jew) or hyper correction (like newsreaders who pronounce Beijing with a French J...not realising that the Chinese J is the same as the English J...)
I've heard the Bei/y/ing thing from Brits, so I think it might be a British "French is fancy and educated", or if the speaker is from the Colonies, further mangled through "British is fancy and educated".
"With au jus" reminded me of visiting the Moorish palace in Granada, Spain. The romanized Arabic name is Al-Ḥamra, "The Red One", which is then rendered in Spanish as "La Alhambra".
And then I overheard some English speakers saying "The la alhambra".
Post by: Dicey on May 10, 2021, 10:50:24 AM
And of course, that only leads to "Hill Hill Hill Hill (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUyXiiIGDTo)".That was great. Thanks!
Post by: BlueHouse on May 10, 2021, 02:49:50 PM
Good point! I'll be grateful for the good things!
there's a realtor in DC who writes very different listings. Some people love it, others hate it. I don't have much of an opinion on it other than I think it's tiresome to try to read more than one listing of his.
here's an example of one of his listings:
Dream House, truly sublime, narcotic light on a fine timeless finish, hypnotic sights while your mind's eye takes flight into endlessly soaring ceiling heights, skillfully built in 2016, a custom machine outfitted with wings, gently test driven so the part you’ve been given, start living in art on a tree-lined street beneath the shadow of the dome where neighbors still greet, an amazing home, a domestic retreat, so city-central with a little village disposition.
https://realestateindc.com/node/901 (https://realestateindc.com/node/901)
Compared to the listings I see here, that's a breath of fresh air. Here, the ads are so full of grammatical errors, tropes, and words-that-don't-mean-what-they-thought-they-meant that I'm forced to conclude that many realtors ended up in that field because they weren't fit for anything else.
Post by: teen persuasion on May 12, 2021, 07:32:00 AM
But that's not called a footpath, it's the towpath, obviously. Even if mules haven't been used to tow canalboats for ages.Tow the line...
It’s “toe the line” people!
Unless they are on a footpath towing a boat up a canal. ;-)
DH often runs along the towpath on the Erie canal, and our HS XC and track teams do, too.
Post by: Frugal Lizard on May 12, 2021, 08:14:28 AM
ROFLI was once at a restaurant in which the menu noted that a particular dish contained "orchard apples." I know apple trees do exist outside of orchards, say, as a solitary tree in someone's yard, but it's unlikely those apples would end up at a restaurant, so... it's safe to say most restaurant apples come from an orchard. It was just such an obvious attempt to get the reader to imagine an orchard with apples growing on the trees, etc. and make an emotionally-influenced decision to choose that dish -- but provided nothing useful about the flavor or the way the dish was cooked.
Also annoying... anything described as "fresh" at a restaurant. Assuming it's not dehydrated or somehow otherwise preserved for long-term storage... shouldn't "fresh" go without saying?!
Oooh, this reminds me of one of my favourite stories.
I was at an event with a bunch of diplomatic staff, and chatting with one of the douchiest men I've ever met. Anyhoo, he finds out my family is from Denmark and then proceeds to educate me that pickled herring is popular in Denmark (oh wow, I didn't know that about my own culture), but that he only eats it when over there because you just can't get it fresh here.
...Pickled
...Herring
......PICKLED!
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 12, 2021, 09:22:28 AM
But that's not called a footpath, it's the towpath, obviously. Even if mules haven't been used to tow canalboats for ages.Tow the line...
It’s “toe the line” people!
Unless they are on a footpath towing a boat up a canal. ;-)
DH often runs along the towpath on the Erie canal, and our HS XC and track teams do, too.
My brain in Covid, no vocabulary.
So they tow the line (line is a term for rope, right) walking along the towpath. Or as at Upper Canada Village, have a horse hitched up to the towline.
Somehow I think whoever used "tow the line" when they meant "toe the line" has no clue about towing and towpaths. ;-)
Post by: solon on May 25, 2021, 03:05:47 PM
I can't even bring myself to open that thread.
Post by: Dicey on May 25, 2021, 05:01:07 PM
"Where are my composters at?"Ditto.
I can't even bring myself to open that thread.
Post by: Metalcat on May 25, 2021, 05:19:19 PM
"Where are my composters at?"Ditto.
I can't even bring myself to open that thread.
Wait, why?
Post by: Travis on May 25, 2021, 06:22:20 PM
I started hearing that phrase only a month ago and I'm already tired of it. It means something like "that's not a real answer and it's more like a cheap sales pitch." I heard it in three separate meetings in a single week this month. I'm guessing someone in corporate America invented it recently and now everyone wants to use it.
Post by: solon on May 25, 2021, 06:29:18 PM
"Where are my composters at?"Ditto.
I can't even bring myself to open that thread.
Wait, why?
Because of the odd construction. Because of the implication that the composters belong to the speaker. Because of the ganster/hip hop vibe.
And it's not just that one thread. I've seen that construction more than one place and it just feels wrong.
To be clear, I don't have anything against composters. Some of the nicest people I know are composters.
Post by: Paul der Krake on May 25, 2021, 06:55:46 PM
"Where are my composters?", or
"Where my composters at"
No half measures.
Post by: Metalcat on May 25, 2021, 08:26:57 PM
"Where are my composters at?"Ditto.
I can't even bring myself to open that thread.
Wait, why?
Because of the odd construction. Because of the implication that the composters belong to the speaker. Because of the ganster/hip hop vibe.
And it's not just that one thread. I've seen that construction more than one place and it just feels wrong.
To be clear, I don't have anything against composters. Some of the nicest people I know are composters.
But, it's AAE grammar, which is not incorrect, it's a legitimate and very, very old dialect where the structure is heavily influenced by British English dialects from the 1600s.
However, if your point is that you assume that the OP doesn't speak AAE and is culturally appropriating, then that's a different matter.
The Cajun "Krewe de Feu" title isn't incorrect either.
Post by: sui generis on May 25, 2021, 09:02:58 PM
Every respectable Original Gangster knows that the allowed constructions are:
"Where are my composters?", or
"Where my composters at"
No half measures.
I was gonna say just this! The "are" and the "at" are functionally redundant. You only need one and using both is cringe-inducing.
Post by: Morning Glory on May 25, 2021, 11:37:41 PM
Every respectable Original Gangster knows that the allowed constructions are:
"Where are my composters?", or
"Where my composters at"
No half measures.
I was gonna say just this! The "are" and the "at" are functionally redundant. You only need one and using both is cringe-inducing.
I thought the combination was cute.
Post by: Morning Glory on May 25, 2021, 11:59:55 PM
"Where are my composters at?"Ditto.
I can't even bring myself to open that thread.
Wait, why?
Because of the odd construction. Because of the implication that the composters belong to the speaker. Because of the ganster/hip hop vibe.
And it's not just that one thread. I've seen that construction more than one place and it just feels wrong.
To be clear, I don't have anything against composters. Some of the nicest people I know are composters.
But, it's AAE grammar, which is not incorrect, it's a legitimate and very, very old dialect where the structure is heavily influenced by British English dialects from the 1600s.
However, if your point is that you assume that the OP doesn't speak AAE and is culturally appropriating, then that's a different matter.
The Cajun "Krewe de Feu" title isn't incorrect either.
It struck me a while back that I ought not to have capitalized "towards" in my journal title either, because one does not capitalize prepositions in titles (at least in apa format). If that was someone's term paper I would have been obliged to deduct a quarter of a point. I'm too tired of rules to change it. Fuck rules.
Post by: iris lily on May 26, 2021, 10:41:53 AM
People! Just say you disagree. There will always be conflicting opinions! It is ok. If both of us have already stated our case then we disagree and that’s fine let’s Move on. When someone says literally “I don’t understand what you mean “that could be an invitation to restate my case but what is the pint of me blabbering on again?. And granted many times it is sincerely said.
But too often it’s not. Passive aggressive stuff makes me crazy Although I suspect in some cases people say that to be polite And I guess that’s OK, I just cannot relate to it.
Post by: Dicey on May 26, 2021, 10:47:28 AM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on May 26, 2021, 12:50:59 PM
Today I am bothered by the phrase “I don’t understand what you mean “ when I am quite sure that is a passive aggressive way to say “I disagree with you. “That's an interesting situation. I maintain social media connections to old friends who have *very* different political leanings from my own. I occasionally will reach out when there's an issue that seems very cut-and-dried to me, yet they hold the opposite viewpoint, and will use phrasing like "can you help me understand the rationale behind opinion X?" because I genuinely want to understand that point of view. They've usually responded respectfully, although some of their friends have responded with comments like "how can you be so insensitive/ignorant/bigoted/whatever as to even ask that question!?"
People! Just say you disagree. There will always be conflicting opinions! It is ok. If both of us have already stated our case then we disagree and that’s fine let’s Move on. When someone says literally “I don’t understand what you mean “that could be an invitation to restate my case but what is the pint of me blabbering on again?. And granted many times it is sincerely said.
But too often it’s not. Passive aggressive stuff makes me crazy Although I suspect in some cases people say that to be polite And I guess that’s OK, I just cannot relate to it.
Maybe it's because I actually want to understand, rather than debate.
Post by: Metalcat on May 26, 2021, 01:16:58 PM
Today I am bothered by the phrase “I don’t understand what you mean “ when I am quite sure that is a passive aggressive way to say “I disagree with you. “
People! Just say you disagree. There will always be conflicting opinions! It is ok. If both of us have already stated our case then we disagree and that’s fine let’s Move on. When someone says literally “I don’t understand what you mean “that could be an invitation to restate my case but what is the pint of me blabbering on again?. And granted many times it is sincerely said.
But too often it’s not. Passive aggressive stuff makes me crazy Although I suspect in some cases people say that to be polite And I guess that’s OK, I just cannot relate to it.
I too despise people being passive aggressive, but I use "I don't understand what you mean" all the time when I feel like I might disagree with the person, but I'm not sure I'm understanding them properly, and I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that I might just not understand them properly.
Post by: iris lily on May 26, 2021, 01:39:51 PM
I don't understand what you mean. [Dicey ducks] Who are these people? Why must you tolerate them? Isn't this the point of achieving FIRE? Asking for a friend.haha, it is in the normal course of forum chit chat, not necessarily here.
Post by: iris lily on May 26, 2021, 01:41:57 PM
Today I am bothered by the phrase “I don’t understand what you mean “ when I am quite sure that is a passive aggressive way to say “I disagree with you. “
People! Just say you disagree. There will always be conflicting opinions! It is ok. If both of us have already stated our case then we disagree and that’s fine let’s Move on. When someone says literally “I don’t understand what you mean “that could be an invitation to restate my case but what is the pint of me blabbering on again?. And granted many times it is sincerely said.
But too often it’s not. Passive aggressive stuff makes me crazy Although I suspect in some cases people say that to be polite And I guess that’s OK, I just cannot relate to it.
I too despise people being passive aggressive, but I use "I don't understand what you mean" all the time when I feel like I might disagree with the person, but I'm not sure I'm understanding them properly, and I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that I might just not understand them properly.
I guess that is fine, that falls into the being polite and considerate camp. Giving the benefit of the doubt is fine if sincerely meant.
Post by: DadJokes on May 27, 2021, 07:03:54 AM
Post by: nereo on May 27, 2021, 07:48:26 AM
I think I use that line from time to time as well, usually in the same manner as Malcat. I think a large number of our problems stem from miscommunication or different perspectives, and understanding other people's perspectives can be a challenge.
Ditto. A teacher of mine once liked to quip that "90% of all arguments stem from a misunderstanding". Not sure about the exact percentage, but it does seem to be an awful lot. I frequently use "I don't understand what you mean" in conversations as a way of slowing it down and clearly defining what it is the speaker is talking about. Often this seems to lead to a more productive conversation, though it also has the side effect of the speaker occasionally thinking I'm either being passive-aggressive or an idiot.
Post by: iris lily on May 27, 2021, 08:16:19 AM
I think I use that line from time to time as well, usually in the same manner as Malcat. I think a large number of our problems stem from miscommunication or different perspectives, and understanding other people's perspectives can be a challenge.
Ditto. A teacher of mine once liked to quip that "90% of all arguments stem from a misunderstanding". Not sure about the exact percentage, but it does seem to be an awful lot. I frequently use "I don't understand what you mean" in conversations as a way of slowing it down and clearly defining what it is the speaker is talking about. Often this seems to lead to a more productive conversation, though it also has the side effect of the speaker occasionally thinking I'm either being passive-aggressive or an idiot.
Edited to make sense:
I understand that it can take a while for speaker x to absorb what speaker Y is saying. I also understand the speaker Y may not have clear expression.
But I think disagreement on a topic, and assuming communication is clear and accurate, comes from values. People disagree because they’re placing value on different pieces of the argument. Speaker X is emphasizing facts a,b,c while speaker Y places his emphasis on facts e and f, and completely discounts b as important to the arguement, may have not considered a and c, or may think a,b,c are largely irrelevant.
Post by: nereo on May 27, 2021, 08:27:08 AM
I think I use that line from time to time as well, usually in the same manner as Malcat. I think a large number of our problems stem from miscommunication or different perspectives, and understanding other people's perspectives can be a challenge.
Ditto. A teacher of mine once liked to quip that "90% of all arguments stem from a misunderstanding". Not sure about the exact percentage, but it does seem to be an awful lot. I frequently use "I don't understand what you mean" in conversations as a way of slowing it down and clearly defining what it is the speaker is talking about. Often this seems to lead to a more productive conversation, though it also has the side effect of the speaker occasionally thinking I'm either being passive-aggressive or an idiot.
I understand that it can take a while for speaker acts to absorb what speaker wire saying. I also understand the speaker wire may not being clear.
But I think disagreement on a topic, and assuming communication is clear and accurate, comes from values. People disagree because they’re placing value on different pieces of the argument. Speaker X is emphasizing facts a,b,c while speaker Y places his emphasis on facts e and f, and completely discounts b as important to the arguement, may have not considered a and c, or may think a,b,c are largely irrelevant.
well there's also the flawed reality concept.
Most people believe that they see the world the way that it actually is, and by extension that others who disagree with them must be viewing the world through a warped reality.
Post by: Morning Glory on May 27, 2021, 05:56:05 PM
I don't understand what they mean.
Post by: nereo on May 28, 2021, 02:15:16 PM
"He certainly has him on speed-dial"
Virtually no one has a phone with a special 'speed-dial' function anymore (or perhaps EVERYONE in your contact list is by default on speed-dial?) Either way this dated phrase doesn't match the life-experiences of roughly half the global population.
Post by: Travis on May 28, 2021, 08:52:05 PM
I've seen a few people on Facebook lately using 'victimize' to mean the opposite of what it actually means. I'm guessing this is just ignorance. "It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote. I've seen it reposted a few times now.
I don't understand what they mean.
Translation: this is a zero-sum argument. My side is right, and there's no room for any other sides. You bringing up a legitimate issue means you're taking away from something I like. And you're not allowed to be neutral. You also have to take my side.
Post by: Metalcat on May 28, 2021, 08:55:09 PM
I've seen a few people on Facebook lately using 'victimize' to mean the opposite of what it actually means. I'm guessing this is just ignorance. "It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote. I've seen it reposted a few times now.
I don't understand what they mean.
Translation: this is a zero-sum argument. My side is right, and there's no room for any other sides. You bringing up a legitimate issue means you're taking away from something I like. And you're not allowed to be neutral. You also have to take my side.
Yeah, that's obvious, but the misuse of the word "victimize" is definitely discombobulating. It's basically Orwellian, using a powerful word to mean the exact opposite of what it means.
Post by: Jenny Wren on May 28, 2021, 09:01:00 PM
I've seen a few people on Facebook lately using 'victimize' to mean the opposite of what it actually means. I'm guessing this is just ignorance. "It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote. I've seen it reposted a few times now.
I don't understand what they mean.
Translation: this is a zero-sum argument. My side is right, and there's no room for any other sides. You bringing up a legitimate issue means you're taking away from something I like. And you're not allowed to be neutral. You also have to take my side.
Yeah, that's obvious, but the misuse of the word "victimize" is definitely discombobulating. It's basically Orwellian, using a powerful word to mean the exact opposite of what it means.
I think the original author was thinking along these lines: "Want to make it mechanical? Mechanize it! Want to make felon a victim? Victim-ize 'em! Wait, that's bad! Y'all, stop victim-izing that felon right now!"
Post by: Travis on May 28, 2021, 09:06:01 PM
I've seen a few people on Facebook lately using 'victimize' to mean the opposite of what it actually means. I'm guessing this is just ignorance. "It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote. I've seen it reposted a few times now.
I don't understand what they mean.
Translation: this is a zero-sum argument. My side is right, and there's no room for any other sides. You bringing up a legitimate issue means you're taking away from something I like. And you're not allowed to be neutral. You also have to take my side.
Yeah, that's obvious, but the misuse of the word "victimize" is definitely discombobulating. It's basically Orwellian, using a powerful word to mean the exact opposite of what it means.
What's the fallacy of turning your opponent's gripe into an extremist position? If Abe brought his highway concerns to a more public forum, you'd probably run into a few people who would tell him to stop playing the victim and trying to bring the entire driving population to heel. More specifically to the police argument, I've seen that exact statement used when the person making the complaint is talking about people being abused at traffic stops, way before anyone has been convicted of a crime. "How dare you take the side of criminals!!" There's word misuse all over the place in an attempt to shut down a discussion.
Post by: Metalcat on May 29, 2021, 07:05:15 AM
I've seen a few people on Facebook lately using 'victimize' to mean the opposite of what it actually means. I'm guessing this is just ignorance. "It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote. I've seen it reposted a few times now.
I don't understand what they mean.
Translation: this is a zero-sum argument. My side is right, and there's no room for any other sides. You bringing up a legitimate issue means you're taking away from something I like. And you're not allowed to be neutral. You also have to take my side.
Yeah, that's obvious, but the misuse of the word "victimize" is definitely discombobulating. It's basically Orwellian, using a powerful word to mean the exact opposite of what it means.
What's the fallacy of turning your opponent's gripe into an extremist position? If Abe brought his highway concerns to a more public forum, you'd probably run into a few people who would tell him to stop playing the victim and trying to bring the entire driving population to heel. More specifically to the police argument, I've seen that exact statement used when the person making the complaint is talking about people being abused at traffic stops, way before anyone has been convicted of a crime. "How dare you take the side of criminals!!" There's word misuse all over the place in an attempt to shut down a discussion.
Yeah, I get that.
I've just never seen "victimized" misused before, so on reading it, it appears to make absolutely no sense. That was the point that the previous poster was trying to make.
I'm not arguing anything about the intent or context, I'm just saying it's really strange to try and make sense of a sentence that uses the term in the opposite way of its meaning. It would be like trying to make sense of a sentence where someone used the term tiny to mean large.
Like "in this red hot housing market, people are paying a premium for tiny houses because they want more space".
It reads like nonsense.
Post by: GuitarStv on May 31, 2021, 03:05:06 PM
Heard this morning on the BBC about the closeness of two particular political leaders:
"He certainly has him on speed-dial"
Virtually no one has a phone with a special 'speed-dial' function anymore (or perhaps EVERYONE in your contact list is by default on speed-dial?) Either way this dated phrase doesn't match the life-experiences of roughly half the global population.
I grew up with a rotary phone in the house. I always thought of push buttons as speed dial . . . try entering multiple 9s on a rotary phone!
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 31, 2021, 06:13:06 PM
Heard this morning on the BBC about the closeness of two particular political leaders:
"He certainly has him on speed-dial"
Virtually no one has a phone with a special 'speed-dial' function anymore (or perhaps EVERYONE in your contact list is by default on speed-dial?) Either way this dated phrase doesn't match the life-experiences of roughly half the global population.
I grew up with a rotary phone in the house. I always thought of push buttons as speed dial . . . try entering multiple 9s on a rotary phone!
Same here - and often having to dial more than once, because a finger slipped part way through dialing and you had to start over. Push buttons were God's gift to dialers.
Post by: BlueHouse on June 02, 2021, 07:45:32 PM
I've seen a few people on Facebook lately using 'victimize' to mean the opposite of what it actually means. I'm guessing this is just ignorance. "It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote. I've seen it reposted a few times now.
I don't understand what they mean.
Translation: this is a zero-sum argument. My side is right, and there's no room for any other sides. You bringing up a legitimate issue means you're taking away from something I like. And you're not allowed to be neutral. You also have to take my side.
Yeah, that's obvious, but the misuse of the word "victimize" is definitely discombobulating. It's basically Orwellian, using a powerful word to mean the exact opposite of what it means.
What's the fallacy of turning your opponent's gripe into an extremist position? If Abe brought his highway concerns to a more public forum, you'd probably run into a few people who would tell him to stop playing the victim and trying to bring the entire driving population to heel. More specifically to the police argument, I've seen that exact statement used when the person making the complaint is talking about people being abused at traffic stops, way before anyone has been convicted of a crime. "How dare you take the side of criminals!!" There's word misuse all over the place in an attempt to shut down a discussion.
Yeah, I get that.
I've just never seen "victimized" misused before, so on reading it, it appears to make absolutely no sense. That was the point that the previous poster was trying to make.
I'm not arguing anything about the intent or context, I'm just saying it's really strange to try and make sense of a sentence that uses the term in the opposite way of its meaning. It would be like trying to make sense of a sentence where someone used the term tiny to mean large.
Like "in this red hot housing market, people are paying a premium for tiny houses because they want more space".
It reads like nonsense.
I'm missing something because I don't see anything wrong with the sentence. Is it possible that I've seen the sentence in question so many times that I've become numb to it? because I get what they're saying (i think).
"It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote.
I read this as if the writer would be someone who disagrees with any of the movements called "defund the police" or "abolish ICE" or "eliminate cash bail" or "reduce probation/supervision in sentencing". In this case, it would mean "No matter what atrocities police may have committed, we must honor them and their authority and stop honoring felons by treating them as victims (singling them out and treating them cruelly)
So I'm reading "victimize" as "turning someone into a victim". Am I reading this wrong?
Post by: Metalcat on June 02, 2021, 08:07:26 PM
I've seen a few people on Facebook lately using 'victimize' to mean the opposite of what it actually means. I'm guessing this is just ignorance. "It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote. I've seen it reposted a few times now.
I don't understand what they mean.
Translation: this is a zero-sum argument. My side is right, and there's no room for any other sides. You bringing up a legitimate issue means you're taking away from something I like. And you're not allowed to be neutral. You also have to take my side.
Yeah, that's obvious, but the misuse of the word "victimize" is definitely discombobulating. It's basically Orwellian, using a powerful word to mean the exact opposite of what it means.
What's the fallacy of turning your opponent's gripe into an extremist position? If Abe brought his highway concerns to a more public forum, you'd probably run into a few people who would tell him to stop playing the victim and trying to bring the entire driving population to heel. More specifically to the police argument, I've seen that exact statement used when the person making the complaint is talking about people being abused at traffic stops, way before anyone has been convicted of a crime. "How dare you take the side of criminals!!" There's word misuse all over the place in an attempt to shut down a discussion.
Yeah, I get that.
I've just never seen "victimized" misused before, so on reading it, it appears to make absolutely no sense. That was the point that the previous poster was trying to make.
I'm not arguing anything about the intent or context, I'm just saying it's really strange to try and make sense of a sentence that uses the term in the opposite way of its meaning. It would be like trying to make sense of a sentence where someone used the term tiny to mean large.
Like "in this red hot housing market, people are paying a premium for tiny houses because they want more space".
It reads like nonsense.
I'm missing something because I don't see anything wrong with the sentence. Is it possible that I've seen the sentence in question so many times that I've become numb to it? because I get what they're saying (i think).
"It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote.
I read this as if the writer would be someone who disagrees with any of the movements called "defund the police" or "abolish ICE" or "eliminate cash bail" or "reduce probation/supervision in sentencing". In this case, it would mean "No matter what atrocities police may have committed, we must honor them and their authority and stop honoring felons by treating them as victims (singling them out and treating them cruelly)
So I'm reading "victimize" as "turning someone into a victim". Am I reading this wrong?
No, you're reading it the way it's intended to be read, but that's not what "victimize" actually means.
To victimize someone means to treat someone unjustly. So if they are "victimizing" felons, that means they are treating the felons unjustly.
It does not mean to treat someone as if they are a victim even though you think they aren't victims, and therefore have not been victimized. So the sentence quoted sounds like gibberish to me.
Someone has to be a victim OF someone in order to be victimized BY them.
That's why I said it's like 1984 Orwellian double speak. It's taking the word "victimize" and literally making it mean something opposite.
I've literally never seen that use of "victimized" before until this thread.
Post by: RWD on June 02, 2021, 08:24:36 PM
I've literally never seen that use of "victimized" before until this thread.Maybe they are confusing it with "vindicate"?
Post by: BlueHouse on June 02, 2021, 08:28:57 PM
I feel as if I'm still on the same thought. Some think felons are being victimized because they are being treated unjustly. (the new crime is harsh treatment). The opposing view (the original hated sentence) is that we need to stop turning felons into victims.
No, you're reading it the way it's intended to be read, but that's not what "victimize" actually means.
To victimize someone means to treat someone unjustly. So if they are "victimizing" felons, that means they are treating the felons unjustly.
It does not mean to treat someone as if they are a victim even though you think they aren't victims, and therefore have not been victimized. So the sentence quoted sounds like gibberish to me.
Someone has to be a victim OF someone in order to be victimized BY them.
That's why I said it's like 1984 Orwellian double speak. It's taking the word "victimize" and literally making it mean something opposite.
I've literally never seen that use of "victimized" before until this thread.
ETA: Well, you're right in that it seems like Orwellian double speak. It's now lost all meaning to me, and I cannot even follow what I think they meant vs. what it sounds like. I give up!
Post by: Metalcat on June 02, 2021, 08:46:07 PM
I feel as if I'm still on the same thought. Some think felons are being victimized because they are being treated unjustly. (the new crime is harsh treatment). The opposing view (the original hated sentence) is that we need to stop turning felons into victims.
No, you're reading it the way it's intended to be read, but that's not what "victimize" actually means.
To victimize someone means to treat someone unjustly. So if they are "victimizing" felons, that means they are treating the felons unjustly.
It does not mean to treat someone as if they are a victim even though you think they aren't victims, and therefore have not been victimized. So the sentence quoted sounds like gibberish to me.
Someone has to be a victim OF someone in order to be victimized BY them.
That's why I said it's like 1984 Orwellian double speak. It's taking the word "victimize" and literally making it mean something opposite.
I've literally never seen that use of "victimized" before until this thread.
ETA: Well, you're right in that it seems like Orwellian double speak. It's now lost all meaning to me, and I cannot even follow what I think they meant vs. what it sounds like. I give up!
Ack, see I totally read it as "we need to stop making felons out to be victims". Perhaps pp and I just totally misinterpreted it.
However, the context is that a cop was killed in the line of duty by a felon, and the family were thanking people for donating to a fund in the officer's name.
So the context doesn't point to the term being used in concern for felons.
Post by: Morning Glory on June 02, 2021, 09:34:16 PM
I've seen a few people on Facebook lately using 'victimize' to mean the opposite of what it actually means. I'm guessing this is just ignorance. "It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote. I've seen it reposted a few times now.
I don't understand what they mean.
Translation: this is a zero-sum argument. My side is right, and there's no room for any other sides. You bringing up a legitimate issue means you're taking away from something I like. And you're not allowed to be neutral. You also have to take my side.
Yeah, that's obvious, but the misuse of the word "victimize" is definitely discombobulating. It's basically Orwellian, using a powerful word to mean the exact opposite of what it means.
What's the fallacy of turning your opponent's gripe into an extremist position? If Abe brought his highway concerns to a more public forum, you'd probably run into a few people who would tell him to stop playing the victim and trying to bring the entire driving population to heel. More specifically to the police argument, I've seen that exact statement used when the person making the complaint is talking about people being abused at traffic stops, way before anyone has been convicted of a crime. "How dare you take the side of criminals!!" There's word misuse all over the place in an attempt to shut down a discussion.
Yeah, I get that.
I've just never seen "victimized" misused before, so on reading it, it appears to make absolutely no sense. That was the point that the previous poster was trying to make.
I'm not arguing anything about the intent or context, I'm just saying it's really strange to try and make sense of a sentence that uses the term in the opposite way of its meaning. It would be like trying to make sense of a sentence where someone used the term tiny to mean large.
Like "in this red hot housing market, people are paying a premium for tiny houses because they want more space".
It reads like nonsense.
I'm missing something because I don't see anything wrong with the sentence. Is it possible that I've seen the sentence in question so many times that I've become numb to it? because I get what they're saying (i think).
"It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote.
I read this as if the writer would be someone who disagrees with any of the movements called "defund the police" or "abolish ICE" or "eliminate cash bail" or "reduce probation/supervision in sentencing". In this case, it would mean "No matter what atrocities police may have committed, we must honor them and their authority and stop honoring felons by treating them as victims (singling them out and treating them cruelly)
So I'm reading "victimize" as "turning someone into a victim". Am I reading this wrong?
No, you're reading it the way it's intended to be read, but that's not what "victimize" actually means.
To victimize someone means to treat someone unjustly. So if they are "victimizing" felons, that means they are treating the felons unjustly.
It does not mean to treat someone as if they are a victim even though you think they aren't victims, and therefore have not been victimized. So the sentence quoted sounds like gibberish to me.
Someone has to be a victim OF someone in order to be victimized BY them.
That's why I said it's like 1984 Orwellian double speak. It's taking the word "victimize" and literally making it mean something opposite.
I've literally never seen that use of "victimized" before until this thread.
Thanks. it came from my step sister, although I think she was just reposting it from somewhere. The reference was to something tragic that happened in a town near her. You explained it better than I could have done. The use of "victimize" was totally wrong and downright confusing. I couldn't just comment on the post because that would get it spread around more.
Post by: Freedomin5 on June 03, 2021, 06:40:59 AM
I've seen a few people on Facebook lately using 'victimize' to mean the opposite of what it actually means. I'm guessing this is just ignorance. "It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote. I've seen it reposted a few times now.
I don't understand what they mean.
Translation: this is a zero-sum argument. My side is right, and there's no room for any other sides. You bringing up a legitimate issue means you're taking away from something I like. And you're not allowed to be neutral. You also have to take my side.
Yeah, that's obvious, but the misuse of the word "victimize" is definitely discombobulating. It's basically Orwellian, using a powerful word to mean the exact opposite of what it means.
What's the fallacy of turning your opponent's gripe into an extremist position? If Abe brought his highway concerns to a more public forum, you'd probably run into a few people who would tell him to stop playing the victim and trying to bring the entire driving population to heel. More specifically to the police argument, I've seen that exact statement used when the person making the complaint is talking about people being abused at traffic stops, way before anyone has been convicted of a crime. "How dare you take the side of criminals!!" There's word misuse all over the place in an attempt to shut down a discussion.
Yeah, I get that.
I've just never seen "victimized" misused before, so on reading it, it appears to make absolutely no sense. That was the point that the previous poster was trying to make.
I'm not arguing anything about the intent or context, I'm just saying it's really strange to try and make sense of a sentence that uses the term in the opposite way of its meaning. It would be like trying to make sense of a sentence where someone used the term tiny to mean large.
Like "in this red hot housing market, people are paying a premium for tiny houses because they want more space".
It reads like nonsense.
I'm missing something because I don't see anything wrong with the sentence. Is it possible that I've seen the sentence in question so many times that I've become numb to it? because I get what they're saying (i think).
"It's time to start honoring officers and stop victimizing felons" is the exact quote.
I read this as if the writer would be someone who disagrees with any of the movements called "defund the police" or "abolish ICE" or "eliminate cash bail" or "reduce probation/supervision in sentencing". In this case, it would mean "No matter what atrocities police may have committed, we must honor them and their authority and stop honoring felons by treating them as victims (singling them out and treating them cruelly)
So I'm reading "victimize" as "turning someone into a victim". Am I reading this wrong?
No, you're reading it the way it's intended to be read, but that's not what "victimize" actually means.
To victimize someone means to treat someone unjustly. So if they are "victimizing" felons, that means they are treating the felons unjustly.
It does not mean to treat someone as if they are a victim even though you think they aren't victims, and therefore have not been victimized. So the sentence quoted sounds like gibberish to me.
Someone has to be a victim OF someone in order to be victimized BY them.
That's why I said it's like 1984 Orwellian double speak. It's taking the word "victimize" and literally making it mean something opposite.
I've literally never seen that use of "victimized" before until this thread.
Thanks. it came from my step sister, although I think she was just reposting it from somewhere. The reference was to something tragic that happened in a town near her. You explained it better than I could have done. The use of "victimize" was totally wrong and downright confusing. I couldn't just comment on the post because that would get it spread around more.
Yes, it reads like gibberish to me too. Another definition of “victimize” is to “exploit” or “take advantage of”. So another way of rephrasing it is:
We need to honor officers and we need to stop taking advantage and exploiting felons.
That makes no sense at all because the collective “we” haven’t been taking advantage of any felons lately, and the statement has nothing to do with society exploiting felons.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on June 03, 2021, 11:30:46 AM
There, fixed that. Can we move on now?
Note: Police brutality really does happen. We need to stand against it. It’s hard to honor police officers when you’re worried some of them might kill you. Also, there are very bad people in this world who are criminals. They are cruel, heartless, and deserve to spend the rest of their lives in jail. That said, many “criminals” are wayward souls, perhaps mentally ill or addicts or both, and what they really need is a parent with a firm hand and also love and care to get them on the right track (self supporting, healthy behaviors) and keep them there. The complexity isn’t captured in the soundbites.
Post by: Dicey on June 03, 2021, 12:28:12 PM
Post by: Metalcat on June 03, 2021, 12:34:29 PM
Not that I'm saying people shouldn't say this, just that I've never heard it until recently, and now I hear it all the time.
"Since I'm [insert age]", as in "I've been playing piano since I'm seven". To me, it sounds strange as opposed to "I've been playing piano since I was seven".
I hear it a lot on tv shows now, so I wonder if it's common to certain US regions.
Post by: DadJokes on June 03, 2021, 12:49:29 PM
I have one.
Not that I'm saying people shouldn't say this, just that I've never heard it until recently, and now I hear it all the time.
"Since I'm [insert age]", as in "I've been playing piano since I'm seven". To me, it sounds strange as opposed to "I've been playing piano since I was seven".
I hear it a lot on tv shows now, so I wonder if it's common to certain US regions.
I've never noticed anyone say it that way before.
Post by: Kris on June 03, 2021, 01:19:51 PM
I have one.
Not that I'm saying people shouldn't say this, just that I've never heard it until recently, and now I hear it all the time.
"Since I'm [insert age]", as in "I've been playing piano since I'm seven". To me, it sounds strange as opposed to "I've been playing piano since I was seven".
I hear it a lot on tv shows now, so I wonder if it's common to certain US regions.
It's definitely something that people who learned English as a second/third/etc. language say, especially people whose first language is a Romance language. I've heard that a lot. And I think it might also be a thing with Jewish people whose ancestors spoke Yiddish.
Post by: Metalcat on June 03, 2021, 06:10:16 PM
I have one.
Not that I'm saying people shouldn't say this, just that I've never heard it until recently, and now I hear it all the time.
"Since I'm [insert age]", as in "I've been playing piano since I'm seven". To me, it sounds strange as opposed to "I've been playing piano since I was seven".
I hear it a lot on tv shows now, so I wonder if it's common to certain US regions.
It's definitely something that people who learned English as a second/third/etc. language say, especially people whose first language is a Romance language. I've heard that a lot. And I think it might also be a thing with Jewish people whose ancestors spoke Yiddish.
Yeah, I grew up around a ton of second language French speakers, but I've never heard first language English speakers use it until recently, and now I've heard it a number of times on tv shows.
Post by: Morning Glory on June 07, 2021, 04:55:58 PM
Post by: nereo on June 07, 2021, 05:35:17 PM
"[name of politician] sucks". My mom lives in a small town and I was very surprised how many yard signs I saw with this on a recent visit, given that it's not even an election year. Even if it was, the statement is so nonspecific it makes me want to ask all of the W questions. They were mostly for either the current or the previous governor of her state, who are from different political parties. In her area there is always a lot of resentment towards the controlling political party because there is a perception that all of the money goes to the big city instead of the rural areas. Saying someone "sucks" just sounds uneducated, especially when no supporting information is provided.
Around here there are a lot of “F____ Biden” and “F___ [state politician]”. It angers me to see such casual vulgar hostility displayed where everyone has to read it. And yes, it makes me want to ask all the “why” questions too...
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 07, 2021, 06:11:30 PM
Post by: Metalcat on June 07, 2021, 07:05:39 PM
Nick names really irk me when they have nothing to do with anything! One person I knew had a nickname of Buster another was chubby. The whole family had stupid nicknames and I have no idea why. I really hate stupid nicknames. If a person has a name that can be cut short like Annette to Anne I can see that. But to give stupid nicknames is ridiculous. On top of that, where does the nick name of Dick come from Richard? Really stupid!
Oh my...
You would not like my family. Our nicknames change constantly and they're insane.
Post by: Morning Glory on June 07, 2021, 07:25:24 PM
"[name of politician] sucks". My mom lives in a small town and I was very surprised how many yard signs I saw with this on a recent visit, given that it's not even an election year. Even if it was, the statement is so nonspecific it makes me want to ask all of the W questions. They were mostly for either the current or the previous governor of her state, who are from different political parties. In her area there is always a lot of resentment towards the controlling political party because there is a perception that all of the money goes to the big city instead of the rural areas. Saying someone "sucks" just sounds uneducated, especially when no supporting information is provided.
Around here there are a lot of “F____ Biden” and “F___ [state politician]”. It angers me to see such casual vulgar hostility displayed where everyone has to read it. And yes, it makes me want to ask all the “why” questions too...
Maybe they think he's not getting laid enough???
Agreed. We are working on not saying the f-word with my six year old and it doesn't help to see stuff like that. Luckily it's not too prevalent in my area. I only saw one of those in my mom's town.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 07, 2021, 08:36:38 PM
Nick names really irk me when they have nothing to do with anything! One person I knew had a nickname of Buster another was chubby. The whole family had stupid nicknames and I have no idea why. I really hate stupid nicknames. If a person has a name that can be cut short like Annette to Anne I can see that. But to give stupid nicknames is ridiculous. On top of that, where does the nick name of Dick come from Richard? Really stupid!
Hmm, Robin Hood and Little John come to mind. Little John was said to be about 7' tall. ;-)
Richard used to be shortened to Dicken. Don't ask me why.
Post by: BlueHouse on June 08, 2021, 06:34:46 AM
Nick names really irk me when they have nothing to do with anything! One person I knew had a nickname of Buster another was chubby. The whole family had stupid nicknames and I have no idea why. I really hate stupid nicknames. If a person has a name that can be cut short like Annette to Anne I can see that. But to give stupid nicknames is ridiculous. On top of that, where does the nick name of Dick come from Richard? Really stupid!
Oh my...
You would not like my family. Our nicknames change constantly and they're insane.
I am not a fan of people's business cards that say spell out a nickname. As in "Robert 'Bob' Smith" . Yes, the "Bob" is in quotes. If you want people to call you that, why not just have "Bob Smith" on the business card?
As for nicknames, everyone in my family has a weird nickname but we don't really use them with people outside the family. It's kind of a shibboleth for us.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on June 08, 2021, 07:25:15 AM
We also often use jokes / puns as the basis for nicknames. So one of our sports players called Jordan Butts is often called Seymour. I had a mate called Greg Hunt and we'd always call him Mike. Etc
Post by: nereo on June 08, 2021, 07:28:57 AM
Nick names really irk me when they have nothing to do with anything! One person I knew had a nickname of Buster another was chubby. The whole family had stupid nicknames and I have no idea why. I really hate stupid nicknames. If a person has a name that can be cut short like Annette to Anne I can see that. But to give stupid nicknames is ridiculous. On top of that, where does the nick name of Dick come from Richard? Really stupid!
Oh my...
You would not like my family. Our nicknames change constantly and they're insane.
I am not a fan of people's business cards that say spell out a nickname. As in "Robert 'Bob' Smith" . Yes, the "Bob" is in quotes. If you want people to call you that, why not just have "Bob Smith" on the business card?
I've always found that odd myself, but it was explained to me that to a subset of the population it's (for reasons I don't comprehend) important to have your full legal name on official/business documents. The name in parentheses tells everyone what you prefer to be called.
I've never used my full legal name and am instantly skeptical whenever someone tries to use it (typically a marketer). Either I'm in some sort of trouble or the person doesn't know who I am - either way I'm unlikely to want to have that conversation.
Here in Australia nicknames are usually used for ironic effect, e.g. a redhead is called Bluey or a tall person is called Tiny.
We also often use jokes / puns as the basis for nicknames. So one of our sports players called Jordan Butts is often called Seymour. I had a mate called Greg Hunt and we'd always call him Mike. Etc
.....Australia...
Post by: Metalcat on June 08, 2021, 07:33:14 AM
Here in Australia nicknames are usually used for ironic effect, e.g. a redhead is called Bluey or a tall person is called Tiny.
We also often use jokes / puns as the basis for nicknames. So one of our sports players called Jordan Butts is often called Seymour. I had a mate called Greg Hunt and we'd always call him Mike. Etc
I watch a lot of Australian TV, because, well Australian TV is amazing, and I LOVE the nicknames.
Post by: Dollar Slice on June 08, 2021, 09:28:27 AM
I am not a fan of people's business cards that say spell out a nickname. As in "Robert 'Bob' Smith" . Yes, the "Bob" is in quotes. If you want people to call you that, why not just have "Bob Smith" on the business card?
I was once given a business card by a law enforcement officer that just said "Officer Bob". :-/ No last name. Just... Bob.
I've never used my full legal name and am instantly skeptical whenever someone tries to use it (typically a marketer).
My mom uses her middle name and knows as soon as someone addresses her by her first name that it's not going to be good. Or, better yet, she got on some telemarketer lists as her first initial and middle name run together. Which was unpronounceable, but they tried. The equivalent of Dollar Slice picking up the phone and having someone say "Hello, is... uh... Dslice there?"
Post by: nereo on June 08, 2021, 09:52:26 AM
Post by: Dollar Slice on June 08, 2021, 10:00:42 AM
You will hereafter be known as "Dslice" to me, @Dollar Slice
OK, but you have to pronounce every consonant very clearly, or I'll get offended.
Post by: Jenny Wren on June 08, 2021, 10:16:38 AM
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 08, 2021, 11:14:15 AM
Another person I know has an animal nickname and it isn't very complimentive to his facial features.
How does Robert turn into Bob anyway? Wouldn't Rob make more sense?
Post by: chaskavitch on June 08, 2021, 12:06:08 PM
But that's just my internet research, so take it with a grain of salt.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 08, 2021, 01:27:21 PM
I am not a fan of people's business cards that say spell out a nickname. As in "Robert 'Bob' Smith" . Yes, the "Bob" is in quotes. If you want people to call you that, why not just have "Bob Smith" on the business card?
I was once given a business card by a law enforcement officer that just said "Officer Bob". :-/ No last name. Just... Bob.I've never used my full legal name and am instantly skeptical whenever someone tries to use it (typically a marketer).
My mom uses her middle name and knows as soon as someone addresses her by her first name that it's not going to be good. Or, better yet, she got on some telemarketer lists as her first initial and middle name run together. Which was unpronounceable, but they tried. The equivalent of Dollar Slice picking up the phone and having someone say "Hello, is... uh... Dslice there?"
My dad has spent decades of his life filling out his middle name first on any documentation he thinks might result in a phone call or ad. Any time someone asks for him by his middle name he just hangs up, any time he gets mail addressed to his middle name he throws it out unread. It's kinda genius.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 08, 2021, 02:34:07 PM
My dad has spent decades of his life filling out his middle name first on any documentation he thinks might result in a phone call or ad. Any time someone asks for him by his middle name he just hangs up, any time he gets mail addressed to his middle name he throws it out unread. It's kinda genius.
That is so much extra work. ;-) Anything with my first name is either very official or very junk mail. Easy.
Post by: Miss Piggy on June 09, 2021, 06:33:36 AM
You will hereafter be known as "Dslice" to me, @Dollar Slice
OK, but you have to pronounce every consonant very clearly, or I'll get offended.
I find myself wanting to add an apostrophe here. Can we make it D'Slice?
Post by: Uturn on June 09, 2021, 06:39:54 AM
That's not my name. My given name is Jenny, not Jennifer! It's on my birth certificate, ID, credit cards, social security statement -- Jennifer isn't on a single document associated with me.
I hear you! We moved a lot growing up and I cannot tell you how many times I was sent to the principal's office because I refused to answer to Joseph.
I closed on a house a couple of weeks ago. At the beginning of the process, I tell the loan officer that my legal name is Joe, not Joseph. Two days before close, I get all new paperwork from the mortgage company with my name changed to Joseph. It seems they have a QA process and the second person decided my name was wrong.
Post by: Dollar Slice on June 09, 2021, 07:40:54 AM
You will hereafter be known as "Dslice" to me, @Dollar Slice
OK, but you have to pronounce every consonant very clearly, or I'll get offended.
I find myself wanting to add an apostrophe here. Can we make it D'Slice?
Sorry, no. That would be disrespecting my cultural heritage. You can either figure out how to to smoothly pronounce the 'dsl' consonant combo, or you can call me Slicey like everyone else. ;-)
Post by: Jouer on June 09, 2021, 10:50:42 AM
My given name was given to me before anyone knew anything about my personality and I had no choice. Nicknames come from friends or family once they get to really know you - to me that's more important/powerful than something given to me at birth.
Post by: BlueHouse on June 09, 2021, 06:59:50 PM
I am not a fan of people's business cards that say spell out a nickname. As in "Robert 'Bob' Smith" . Yes, the "Bob" is in quotes. If you want people to call you that, why not just have "Bob Smith" on the business card?
I was once given a business card by a law enforcement officer that just said "Officer Bob". :-/ No last name. Just... Bob.I've never used my full legal name and am instantly skeptical whenever someone tries to use it (typically a marketer).
My mom uses her middle name and knows as soon as someone addresses her by her first name that it's not going to be good. Or, better yet, she got on some telemarketer lists as her first initial and middle name run together. Which was unpronounceable, but they tried. The equivalent of Dollar Slice picking up the phone and having someone say "Hello, is... uh... Dslice there?"
My dad has spent decades of his life filling out his middle name first on any documentation he thinks might result in a phone call or ad. Any time someone asks for him by his middle name he just hangs up, any time he gets mail addressed to his middle name he throws it out unread. It's kinda genius.
I use my initials, and many websites don't allow periods in the name fields, so I just remove the periods. It spells out what could be a name. I guess. and a lot of people call for "En". Unfortunately or maybe fortunately, I always "hear" it as "N.Bluehouse" and get confused and then say "who? who? what" and I'm usually confused enough that they hang up and remove me from their list because they don't think I'm faking the confusion.
My last name is a male first name, like Richard. As children, my mom used to subscribe to National Geographic in the name of "Richard Children" which was shortened to "Richard Chidrn" for the mailing labels. All of my siblings and I still sign birthday cards to each other as "Richard Chidrn"
on another note, I only recently realized that someone I know who goes by the name of Billy Bob is actually named William Robert. It would never ever occur to me to give a nickname to a middle name.
Post by: Morning Glory on June 09, 2021, 07:21:53 PM
I am not a fan of people's business cards that say spell out a nickname. As in "Robert 'Bob' Smith" . Yes, the "Bob" is in quotes. If you want people to call you that, why not just have "Bob Smith" on the business card?
I was once given a business card by a law enforcement officer that just said "Officer Bob". :-/ No last name. Just... Bob.I've never used my full legal name and am instantly skeptical whenever someone tries to use it (typically a marketer).
My mom uses her middle name and knows as soon as someone addresses her by her first name that it's not going to be good. Or, better yet, she got on some telemarketer lists as her first initial and middle name run together. Which was unpronounceable, but they tried. The equivalent of Dollar Slice picking up the phone and having someone say "Hello, is... uh... Dslice there?"
My dad has spent decades of his life filling out his middle name first on any documentation he thinks might result in a phone call or ad. Any time someone asks for him by his middle name he just hangs up, any time he gets mail addressed to his middle name he throws it out unread. It's kinda genius.
I use my initials, and many websites don't allow periods in the name fields, so I just remove the periods. It spells out what could be a name. I guess. and a lot of people call for "En". Unfortunately or maybe fortunately, I always "hear" it as "N.Bluehouse" and get confused and then say "who? who? what" and I'm usually confused enough that they hang up and remove me from their list because they don't think I'm faking the confusion.
My last name is a male first name, like Richard. As children, my mom used to subscribe to National Geographic in the name of "Richard Children" which was shortened to "Richard Chidrn" for the mailing labels. All of my siblings and I still sign birthday cards to each other as "Richard Chidrn"
on another note, I only recently realized that someone I know who goes by the name of Billy Bob is actually named William Robert. It would never ever occur to me to give a nickname to a middle name.
My brother has a last name that could be a first name, and a first name that could be a last name. No middle. His first and last get confused all the time.
Post by: Travis on June 10, 2021, 05:37:20 AM
That's not my name. My given name is Jenny, not Jennifer! It's on my birth certificate, ID, credit cards, social security statement -- Jennifer isn't on a single document associated with me.
I hear you! We moved a lot growing up and I cannot tell you how many times I was sent to the principal's office because I refused to answer to Joseph.
I closed on a house a couple of weeks ago. At the beginning of the process, I tell the loan officer that my legal name is Joe, not Joseph. Two days before close, I get all new paperwork from the mortgage company with my name changed to Joseph. It seems they have a QA process and the second person decided my name was wrong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1tHYx_sr6o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1tHYx_sr6o)
Post by: slackmax on June 11, 2021, 07:11:47 AM
Garfrabshuh. Niquelbilf. Nushembra. Kalifra. Jelfrabah. and on and on. Almost always three syllables, sometimes two.
Why can't they just give it a normal name like "antacid pill' by J and J. ?
And why is there always some slob with a shirt hanging open, walking in slow motion, whose expression says he is in quaaludes?
Post by: Metalcat on June 11, 2021, 07:13:48 AM
Ridiculous made up names for prescription drugs in TV commercials.
Garfrabshuh. Niquelbilf. Nushembra. Kalifra. Jelfrabah. and on and on. Almost always three syllables, sometimes two.
Why can't they just give it a normal name like "antacid pill' by J and J. ?
And why is there always some slob with a shirt hanging open, walking in slow motion, whose expression says he is in quaaludes?
I love visiting the US and seeing pharmaceutical ads, it's always such a trip.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on June 11, 2021, 07:20:28 AM
It always mystifies me to see them, and makes me wonder how effective the "ask your doctor about X medication" approach actually is.Ridiculous made up names for prescription drugs in TV commercials.
Garfrabshuh. Niquelbilf. Nushembra. Kalifra. Jelfrabah. and on and on. Almost always three syllables, sometimes two.
Why can't they just give it a normal name like "antacid pill' by J and J. ?
And why is there always some slob with a shirt hanging open, walking in slow motion, whose expression says he is in quaaludes?
I love visiting the US and seeing pharmaceutical ads, it's always such a trip.
Post by: Metalcat on June 11, 2021, 07:28:49 AM
It always mystifies me to see them, and makes me wonder how effective the "ask your doctor about X medication" approach actually is.Ridiculous made up names for prescription drugs in TV commercials.
Garfrabshuh. Niquelbilf. Nushembra. Kalifra. Jelfrabah. and on and on. Almost always three syllables, sometimes two.
Why can't they just give it a normal name like "antacid pill' by J and J. ?
And why is there always some slob with a shirt hanging open, walking in slow motion, whose expression says he is in quaaludes?
I love visiting the US and seeing pharmaceutical ads, it's always such a trip.
Well, I'm currently on a medication specifically because I saw an ad for it while traveling in the US and my MD hadn't heard of it yet.
In my practice, ads for over the counter drugs and products definitely influenced patient questions and concerns.
Post by: Morning Glory on June 11, 2021, 08:12:09 AM
Ridiculous made up names for prescription drugs in TV commercials.
Garfrabshuh. Niquelbilf. Nushembra. Kalifra. Jelfrabah. and on and on. Almost always three syllables, sometimes two.
Why can't they just give it a normal name like "antacid pill' by J and J. ?
And why is there always some slob with a shirt hanging open, walking in slow motion, whose expression says he is in quaaludes?
It is on purpose. They make the generic name difficult to pronounce because they want us to refer to it by the brand name. There's some psychology behind all the X's and Z's too (makes it sound more high tech???). The new ones all seem to have an "oo" sound, maybe to make them sound new.
Some of the old ones from before the advertising are almost like inside jokes (e.g. go-lytely). There's even a real drug called Soma.
Post by: Jouer on June 11, 2021, 08:32:52 AM
It always mystifies me to see them, and makes me wonder how effective the "ask your doctor about X medication" approach actually is.Ridiculous made up names for prescription drugs in TV commercials.
Garfrabshuh. Niquelbilf. Nushembra. Kalifra. Jelfrabah. and on and on. Almost always three syllables, sometimes two.
Why can't they just give it a normal name like "antacid pill' by J and J. ?
And why is there always some slob with a shirt hanging open, walking in slow motion, whose expression says he is in quaaludes?
I love visiting the US and seeing pharmaceutical ads, it's always such a trip.
Marketing works....else these companies wouldn't spend so much $$ on it. I would suggest it works less on MMMers so it may be hard to imagine the value.
"ask your doctor about X medication" is actually a pretty strong call to action. Simple and straight to the point.
Post by: Travis on June 11, 2021, 09:05:10 AM
It always mystifies me to see them, and makes me wonder how effective the "ask your doctor about X medication" approach actually is.Ridiculous made up names for prescription drugs in TV commercials.
Garfrabshuh. Niquelbilf. Nushembra. Kalifra. Jelfrabah. and on and on. Almost always three syllables, sometimes two.
Why can't they just give it a normal name like "antacid pill' by J and J. ?
And why is there always some slob with a shirt hanging open, walking in slow motion, whose expression says he is in quaaludes?
I love visiting the US and seeing pharmaceutical ads, it's always such a trip.
Marketing works....else these companies wouldn't spend so much $$ on it. I would suggest it works less on MMMers so it may be hard to imagine the value.
"ask your doctor about X medication" is actually a pretty strong call to action. Simple and straight to the point.
Frightening that there's payoff for the effort. "Here's a drug so new and dangerous that only your doctor can prescribe it. Go ask him about it." And somehow this works. Mentioning an ad on tv will convince your doc to give you a pill.
Post by: Metalcat on June 11, 2021, 08:49:22 PM
It always mystifies me to see them, and makes me wonder how effective the "ask your doctor about X medication" approach actually is.Ridiculous made up names for prescription drugs in TV commercials.
Garfrabshuh. Niquelbilf. Nushembra. Kalifra. Jelfrabah. and on and on. Almost always three syllables, sometimes two.
Why can't they just give it a normal name like "antacid pill' by J and J. ?
And why is there always some slob with a shirt hanging open, walking in slow motion, whose expression says he is in quaaludes?
I love visiting the US and seeing pharmaceutical ads, it's always such a trip.
Marketing works....else these companies wouldn't spend so much $$ on it. I would suggest it works less on MMMers so it may be hard to imagine the value.
"ask your doctor about X medication" is actually a pretty strong call to action. Simple and straight to the point.
Frightening that there's payoff for the effort. "Here's a drug so new and dangerous that only your doctor can prescribe it. Go ask him about it." And somehow this works. Mentioning an ad on tv will convince your doc to give you a pill.
Not exactly. It's more that ads for drugs trigger people to have conversations with their MDs that they might not otherwise have. A lot of people don't even think to talk to their doctor about things until an ad tells them there's a solution.
However, in my case, the ad I saw in the US was for an entirely new class of drugs that my doctor had never heard of. I was one of the first people in Canada to get it as a result.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 21, 2021, 11:38:10 AM
I know people who call margarine...mar ga reene.
People who don't seem to know the difference between ask and ax. I ax my mother if I could take her car to the store.
Post by: Metalcat on June 21, 2021, 12:19:24 PM
People referring to a refrigerator as an 'icebox'.
I know people who call margarine...mar ga reene.
People who don't seem to know the difference between ask and ax. I ax my mother if I could take her car to the store.
"Ax(e)" instead of "Ask" is another case of African American Vernacular English. It's a valid version of the word in that context.
So it depends on the person's background.
"I'm finna ax you something" is not grammatically incorrect.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 21, 2021, 12:48:40 PM
People referring to a refrigerator as an 'icebox'.
I know people who call margarine...mar ga reene.
People who don't seem to know the difference between ask and ax. I ax my mother if I could take her car to the store.
"Ax(e)" instead of "Ask" is another case of African American Vernacular English. It's a valid version of the word in that context.
So it depends on the person's background.
"I'm finna ax you something" is not grammatically incorrect.
Bad English shouldn't magically be considered grammatically correct because the speaker carries a particular skin type.
If a white hillbilly says "Me and my sister gets into a fight sometimes" it's not grammatically correct. If a black guy says "I'm finna ax you something" that's also not gramatically correct.
Post by: sui generis on June 21, 2021, 01:09:48 PM
People referring to a refrigerator as an 'icebox'.
I know people who call margarine...mar ga reene.
People who don't seem to know the difference between ask and ax. I ax my mother if I could take her car to the store.
"Ax(e)" instead of "Ask" is another case of African American Vernacular English. It's a valid version of the word in that context.
So it depends on the person's background.
"I'm finna ax you something" is not grammatically incorrect.
Bad English shouldn't magically be considered grammatically correct because the speaker carries a particular skin type.
If a white hillbilly says "Me and my sister gets into a fight sometimes" it's not grammatically correct. If a black guy says "I'm finna ax you something" that's also not gramatically correct.
Actually the pronunciation (maybe even spelling, can't remember) of this word has flipped back and forth over the past few centuries. I used to be a devoted listener to A Way with Words on NPR (https://www.waywordradio.org/) and they did a piece on this in an episode like 10-12 years ago. They talked about "ax" being the more common pronunciation back in the 1600s. It was fascinating.
Post by: Paul der Krake on June 21, 2021, 01:19:47 PM
Post by: Metalcat on June 21, 2021, 02:04:05 PM
People referring to a refrigerator as an 'icebox'.
I know people who call margarine...mar ga reene.
People who don't seem to know the difference between ask and ax. I ax my mother if I could take her car to the store.
"Ax(e)" instead of "Ask" is another case of African American Vernacular English. It's a valid version of the word in that context.
So it depends on the person's background.
"I'm finna ax you something" is not grammatically incorrect.
Bad English shouldn't magically be considered grammatically correct because the speaker carries a particular skin type.
If a white hillbilly says "Me and my sister gets into a fight sometimes" it's not grammatically correct. If a black guy says "I'm finna ax you something" that's also not gramatically correct.
AAVE is a recognized and legitimate dialect of English that is very, very old in it's roots and structure.
I'm sorry, but your position is not supported by any world experts in language. I thought the same as you until I got a degree in linguistics.
Post by: dougules on June 21, 2021, 03:58:42 PM
Usage, consensus, and institutional acceptance is ultimately what makes something "correct". Vernaculars are not correct, by definition, whether it's Black English or Hawaiian Pidgin or Appalachian English. That doesn't necessarily mean they should be rooted out, in fact they often bring a richness to the more accepted form of the language as things bleed in and out. But trying to put them on the same level to prove... what exactly? That seems silly.
If it sounds right to speakers of any given dialect, then it is right. When people say "incorrect" English, they should be saying "non-standard" if it is something that makes sense within the rules of a given dialect. Otherwise, you could just say American English is just incorrect British English or that English in general is just incorrect German.
Post by: Paul der Krake on June 21, 2021, 04:19:32 PM
Sure, for any small enough group, anything and everything can be correct. But it won't exist outside of the group and won't be circulated in print. And without institutional acceptance, a language is relegated to being a forever diminishing curiosity, as the number of speakers dwindles and the group identity weakens. That is the logical curse of languages that are too close to a dominant variation.Usage, consensus, and institutional acceptance is ultimately what makes something "correct". Vernaculars are not correct, by definition, whether it's Black English or Hawaiian Pidgin or Appalachian English. That doesn't necessarily mean they should be rooted out, in fact they often bring a richness to the more accepted form of the language as things bleed in and out. But trying to put them on the same level to prove... what exactly? That seems silly.
If it sounds right to speakers of any given dialect, then it is right. When people say "incorrect" English, they should be saying "non-standard" if it is something that makes sense within the rules of a given dialect. Otherwise, you could just say American English is just incorrect British English or that English in general is just incorrect German.
Post by: Metalcat on June 21, 2021, 04:25:18 PM
Sure, for any small enough group, anything and everything can be correct. But it won't exist outside of the group and won't be circulated in print. And without institutional acceptance, a language is relegated to being a forever diminishing curiosity, as the number of speakers dwindles and the group identity weakens. That is the logical curse of languages that are too close to a dominant variation.Usage, consensus, and institutional acceptance is ultimately what makes something "correct". Vernaculars are not correct, by definition, whether it's Black English or Hawaiian Pidgin or Appalachian English. That doesn't necessarily mean they should be rooted out, in fact they often bring a richness to the more accepted form of the language as things bleed in and out. But trying to put them on the same level to prove... what exactly? That seems silly.
If it sounds right to speakers of any given dialect, then it is right. When people say "incorrect" English, they should be saying "non-standard" if it is something that makes sense within the rules of a given dialect. Otherwise, you could just say American English is just incorrect British English or that English in general is just incorrect German.
But many dialects aren't obscure and spoken by dwindling populations. There are many robust dialects all over the world.
The point stands though, old non standard dialects that have persisted for hundreds of years should not be called "incorrect". They may not be the standard used in professional contexts, but they aren't incorrect. And speakers of AAVE in particular have been inappropriately criticized as speaking "wrong" for a very long time.
Post by: Paul der Krake on June 21, 2021, 04:52:31 PM
I think this is a distinction without a difference. If hardly anybody will print a dialect, formally teach it in schools, offer translations to and from, or use it for anything "serious", what good does it do that it's considered correct?Sure, for any small enough group, anything and everything can be correct. But it won't exist outside of the group and won't be circulated in print. And without institutional acceptance, a language is relegated to being a forever diminishing curiosity, as the number of speakers dwindles and the group identity weakens. That is the logical curse of languages that are too close to a dominant variation.Usage, consensus, and institutional acceptance is ultimately what makes something "correct". Vernaculars are not correct, by definition, whether it's Black English or Hawaiian Pidgin or Appalachian English. That doesn't necessarily mean they should be rooted out, in fact they often bring a richness to the more accepted form of the language as things bleed in and out. But trying to put them on the same level to prove... what exactly? That seems silly.
If it sounds right to speakers of any given dialect, then it is right. When people say "incorrect" English, they should be saying "non-standard" if it is something that makes sense within the rules of a given dialect. Otherwise, you could just say American English is just incorrect British English or that English in general is just incorrect German.
But many dialects aren't obscure and spoken by dwindling populations. There are many robust dialects all over the world.
The point stands though, old non standard dialects that have persisted for hundreds of years should not be called "incorrect". They may not be the standard used in professional contexts, but they aren't incorrect. And speakers of AAVE in particular have been inappropriately criticized as speaking "wrong" for a very long time.
I agree that there are tons of robust dialects all over the world. Catalan, Swiss German, Haitian Creole, etc. But those have, for lack of a better phrase, institutional backing. Do you have examples of robust dialects that don't? To me, you can't really have one without the other. And yes, that is circular logic, because that's how networks work.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 21, 2021, 06:04:15 PM
"Youse" is part of the Valley dialect (Ottawa Valley). Also non-standard English.
Any group can have their own special vocabulary and pronunciation. The question is, will it be understood outside that group.
Post by: Metalcat on June 21, 2021, 06:16:51 PM
Quebec English is a recognized dialect. Basically English with a lot of Quebec French mixed in. I had to learn/replace some vocabulary when I moved to Ontario.
"Youse" is part of the Valley dialect (Ottawa Valley). Also non-standard English.
Any group can have their own special vocabulary and pronunciation. The question is, will it be understood outside that group.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I speak English and French, but can't understand Acadian French, which has a bunch of English blended in.
Do Acadian speakers need to learn more standard dialects to get by in a lot of professional contexts? Yep. That doesn't mean their dialect is incorrect or "bad grammar".
That's the only point I'm trying to make. Dialects are NOT bad grammar, they are valid linguistic structures. They are not errors or deviations from proper grammar.
It's one thing to say Standard English is dominant and that fluency is often necessary to be understood and succeed professionally, but that doesn't mean that dialectical difference are errors or mistakes.
Dialectical differences are correct within their own dialect, which have their own rules. What constitutes a grammatical error is dependent on the dialect being spoken.
What constitutes a dialect is actually formally defined. It's not just little quirks within groups.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 21, 2021, 06:20:20 PM
People referring to a refrigerator as an 'icebox'.
I know people who call margarine...mar ga reene.
People who don't seem to know the difference between ask and ax. I ax my mother if I could take her car to the store.
"Ax(e)" instead of "Ask" is another case of African American Vernacular English. It's a valid version of the word in that context.
So it depends on the person's background.
"I'm finna ax you something" is not grammatically incorrect.
Bad English shouldn't magically be considered grammatically correct because the speaker carries a particular skin type.
If a white hillbilly says "Me and my sister gets into a fight sometimes" it's not grammatically correct. If a black guy says "I'm finna ax you something" that's also not gramatically correct.
AAVE is a recognized and legitimate dialect of English that is very, very old in it's roots and structure.
I'm sorry, but your position is not supported by any world experts in language. I thought the same as you until I got a degree in linguistics.
Appalachian English of the sort that I posted (it was actually directly taken from the wikipedia article on Appalachian vernacular - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_English (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_English)) as an example of hillbilly speak has roots at least as old as (if not older) than AAVE. It's a mix of 16th and 18th century English and has roots that go back further than the slave trade in the US. Both hillbilly talk (AVE I guess you would define it Appalachian Vernacular English) and AAVE are still grammatically incorrect though - as the length of time that people have been speaking improperly doesn't really matter.
Note that there's a difference between 'grammatically incorrect' as it pertains to the English language, and 'bad'. I enjoy hearing slang, patois, regional dialects, and vernaculars in speech . . . they're appropriate in types of music, poetry, casual conversation, etc. They add a richness to the language that is lovely. However, they shouldn't be used for essay writing, research papers, technical manuals, etc. where proper English should be used as they deviate from correct grammar.
Post by: Metalcat on June 21, 2021, 06:25:08 PM
People referring to a refrigerator as an 'icebox'.
I know people who call margarine...mar ga reene.
People who don't seem to know the difference between ask and ax. I ax my mother if I could take her car to the store.
"Ax(e)" instead of "Ask" is another case of African American Vernacular English. It's a valid version of the word in that context.
So it depends on the person's background.
"I'm finna ax you something" is not grammatically incorrect.
Bad English shouldn't magically be considered grammatically correct because the speaker carries a particular skin type.
If a white hillbilly says "Me and my sister gets into a fight sometimes" it's not grammatically correct. If a black guy says "I'm finna ax you something" that's also not gramatically correct.
AAVE is a recognized and legitimate dialect of English that is very, very old in it's roots and structure.
I'm sorry, but your position is not supported by any world experts in language. I thought the same as you until I got a degree in linguistics.
Appalachian English of the sort that I posted (it was actually directly taken from the wikipedia article on Appalachian vernacular - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_English (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_English)) as an example of hillbilly speak has roots at least as old as (if not older) than AAVE. It's a mix of 16th and 18th century English and has roots that go back further than the slave trade in the US. Both hillbilly talk (AVE I guess you would define it Appalachian Vernacular English) and AAVE are still grammatically incorrect though - as the length of time that people have been speaking improperly doesn't really matter.
Note that there's a difference between 'grammatically incorrect' as it pertains to the English language, and 'bad'. I enjoy hearing slang, patois, regional dialects, and vernaculars in speech . . . they're appropriate in types of music, poetry, casual conversation, etc. They add a richness to the language that is lovely. However, they shouldn't be used for essay writing, research papers, technical manuals, etc. where proper English should be used as they deviate from correct grammar.
Agree to disagree.
I don't refer to Standard English as "proper English". Other dialects are not errors, they are just not Standard English.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 21, 2021, 07:19:03 PM
Quebec English is a recognized dialect. Basically English with a lot of Quebec French mixed in. I had to learn/replace some vocabulary when I moved to Ontario.
"Youse" is part of the Valley dialect (Ottawa Valley). Also non-standard English.
Any group can have their own special vocabulary and pronunciation. The question is, will it be understood outside that group.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I speak English and French, but can't understand Acadian French, which has a bunch of English blended in.
Do Acadian speakers need to learn more standard dialects to get by in a lot of professional contexts? Yep. That doesn't mean their dialect is incorrect or "bad grammar".
That's the only point I'm trying to make. Dialects are NOT bad grammar, they are valid linguistic structures. They are not errors or deviations from proper grammar.
It's one thing to say Standard English is dominant and that fluency is often necessary to be understood and succeed professionally, but that doesn't mean that dialectical difference are errors or mistakes.
Dialectical differences are correct within their own dialect, which have their own rules. What constitutes a grammatical error is dependent on the dialect being spoken.
What constitutes a dialect is actually formally defined. It's not just little quirks within groups.
Newfoundand has it's own dialect which I would guess is as old and distinct as the Appalachian dialect.
Joual is certainly a recognized French dialect, which is different from Acadian French. I was surprised to learn, several years ago, that Quebec English is a recognized dialect. I thought we were just continuing the standard English language practice of borrowing words. I never even thought of my language quirks as odd until I went out-of-province*. I know there are varying vocabularies across Canada. Who knew a hoodie is a bunnyhug? A Quebecer has no idea what a slough is but an Albertan does. I leave it to the linguists to decide what is a variant and what is a dialect.
* Does anyone else say out-of-province or is it just us? ROC, please tell me.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 21, 2021, 09:15:53 PM
People referring to a refrigerator as an 'icebox'.
I know people who call margarine...mar ga reene.
People who don't seem to know the difference between ask and ax. I ax my mother if I could take her car to the store.
"Ax(e)" instead of "Ask" is another case of African American Vernacular English. It's a valid version of the word in that context.
So it depends on the person's background.
"I'm finna ax you something" is not grammatically incorrect.
Bad English shouldn't magically be considered grammatically correct because the speaker carries a particular skin type.
If a white hillbilly says "Me and my sister gets into a fight sometimes" it's not grammatically correct. If a black guy says "I'm finna ax you something" that's also not gramatically correct.
AAVE is a recognized and legitimate dialect of English that is very, very old in it's roots and structure.
I'm sorry, but your position is not supported by any world experts in language. I thought the same as you until I got a degree in linguistics.
Appalachian English of the sort that I posted (it was actually directly taken from the wikipedia article on Appalachian vernacular - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_English (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_English)) as an example of hillbilly speak has roots at least as old as (if not older) than AAVE. It's a mix of 16th and 18th century English and has roots that go back further than the slave trade in the US. Both hillbilly talk (AVE I guess you would define it Appalachian Vernacular English) and AAVE are still grammatically incorrect though - as the length of time that people have been speaking improperly doesn't really matter.
Note that there's a difference between 'grammatically incorrect' as it pertains to the English language, and 'bad'. I enjoy hearing slang, patois, regional dialects, and vernaculars in speech . . . they're appropriate in types of music, poetry, casual conversation, etc. They add a richness to the language that is lovely. However, they shouldn't be used for essay writing, research papers, technical manuals, etc. where proper English should be used as they deviate from correct grammar.
Agree to disagree.
I don't refer to Standard English as "proper English". Other dialects are not errors, they are just not Standard English.
Let's say you're in university studying for your degree in biology. You need to write a paper. Will you write your paper in in AVE, AAVE, or Standard English? Let's say you're writing a resume to get a job. Would you write your resume in AVE or AAVE, or Standard English? Now let's say you get that job . . . and your work is to do technical writing documenting the features of a new electronic device. Are you going to write your documents in AVE or AAVE?, or will you choose grammatically correct English? Now what if you're writing a legal brief? Or a psychologist writing up a report about a patient? Or a media relations specialist writing a press release?
If AVE and AAVE are equally as proper to use as Standard English, then shouldn't they all be interchangeable? If they're equally correct then why even teach Standard English in school at all in preference of one of the many other vernaculars available?
I initially called your example 'Bad English' (which - quite justifiably - ruffled some feathers) because I was thinking from a corporate/employment/education perspective. In these cases, the use of non-Standard English is certainly an error. Again, the term 'proper' was not intended to denigrate slang/patios/vernacular (I hold nothing against Appalachian, Newfoundlander, Ottawa Valley, or Ebonics speaking brethren), but to differentiate between the form of English as accepted for everything (which you term 'Standard English') and the dialect/vernacular of naturally more limited use.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on June 21, 2021, 11:15:33 PM
A purely descriptivist approach is how you end up losing the distinction between imply and infer or disinterested and uninterested or verbal and oral. If we never push back we'll just see all these meanings elided into a yucky mess. It's okay to criticise bad thought processes and lazy enunciation, folks.
Post by: Metalcat on June 22, 2021, 06:17:11 AM
People referring to a refrigerator as an 'icebox'.
I know people who call margarine...mar ga reene.
People who don't seem to know the difference between ask and ax. I ax my mother if I could take her car to the store.
"Ax(e)" instead of "Ask" is another case of African American Vernacular English. It's a valid version of the word in that context.
So it depends on the person's background.
"I'm finna ax you something" is not grammatically incorrect.
Bad English shouldn't magically be considered grammatically correct because the speaker carries a particular skin type.
If a white hillbilly says "Me and my sister gets into a fight sometimes" it's not grammatically correct. If a black guy says "I'm finna ax you something" that's also not gramatically correct.
AAVE is a recognized and legitimate dialect of English that is very, very old in it's roots and structure.
I'm sorry, but your position is not supported by any world experts in language. I thought the same as you until I got a degree in linguistics.
Appalachian English of the sort that I posted (it was actually directly taken from the wikipedia article on Appalachian vernacular - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_English (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_English)) as an example of hillbilly speak has roots at least as old as (if not older) than AAVE. It's a mix of 16th and 18th century English and has roots that go back further than the slave trade in the US. Both hillbilly talk (AVE I guess you would define it Appalachian Vernacular English) and AAVE are still grammatically incorrect though - as the length of time that people have been speaking improperly doesn't really matter.
Note that there's a difference between 'grammatically incorrect' as it pertains to the English language, and 'bad'. I enjoy hearing slang, patois, regional dialects, and vernaculars in speech . . . they're appropriate in types of music, poetry, casual conversation, etc. They add a richness to the language that is lovely. However, they shouldn't be used for essay writing, research papers, technical manuals, etc. where proper English should be used as they deviate from correct grammar.
Agree to disagree.
I don't refer to Standard English as "proper English". Other dialects are not errors, they are just not Standard English.
Let's say you're in university studying for your degree in biology. You need to write a paper. Will you write your paper in in AVE, AAVE, or Standard English? Let's say you're writing a resume to get a job. Would you write your resume in AVE or AAVE, or Standard English? Now let's say you get that job . . . and your work is to do technical writing documenting the features of a new electronic device. Are you going to write your documents in AVE or AAVE?, or will you choose grammatically correct English? Now what if you're writing a legal brief? Or a psychologist writing up a report about a patient? Or a media relations specialist writing a press release?
If AVE and AAVE are equally as proper to use as Standard English, then shouldn't they all be interchangeable? If they're equally correct then why even teach Standard English in school at all in preference of one of the many other vernaculars available?
I initially called your example 'Bad English' (which - quite justifiably - ruffled some feathers) because I was thinking from a corporate/employment/education perspective. In these cases, the use of non-Standard English is certainly an error. Again, the term 'proper' was not intended to denigrate slang/patios/vernacular (I hold nothing against Appalachian, Newfoundlander, Ottawa Valley, or Ebonics speaking brethren), but to differentiate between the form of English as accepted for everything (which you term 'Standard English') and the dialect/vernacular of naturally more limited use.
I've made my points clear, you are entitled to disagree with them.
Post by: Roadrunner53 on June 22, 2021, 06:41:20 AM
Post by: Sanitary Stache on June 22, 2021, 08:49:46 AM
I get very frustrated when someone tells me I have to do something and doesn't provide either a reason to convince me or a written directive from someone I am willing to follow.
This phrase is bullshit and I am not going to do whatever you say "legal" is "requiring" me to do.
Post by: Cool Friend on June 22, 2021, 10:43:28 AM
A purely descriptivist approach is how you end up losing the distinction between imply and infer or disinterested and uninterested or verbal and oral. If we never push back we'll just see all these meanings elided into a yucky mess.
Do you think the descriptivist approach is new? This is how human language has worked for all of recorded history. Dictionaries record how people actually use language; they are not prescriptive. Meanings can and do change all the time. For example, "elide" originally meant "annul," which would make your use of it incorrect. In our day, it's often used to mean "merge" or "conflate," which is okay. Because language is not a fixed structure, it's in constant flux.
edit: as for the "ax/ask" thing, take it up with Chaucer. Ax has been used as a variant of ask for at least 1,000 years.
Post by: BlueHouse on June 22, 2021, 10:55:36 AM
* Does anyone else say out-of-province or is it just us? ROC, please tell me.
When I lived in Atlanta, many people who lived inside the Beltway (highway that circles Atlanta and its inner suburbs) refused to attend parties or doctors or stores or even date someone or generally just travel "OTB" (Outside the Beltway). I seriously never heard so many people consistently use a phrase to represent the geographically undesirable.
Do you say OOP or spell it all out?
Post by: dougules on June 22, 2021, 12:30:31 PM
Let's say you're in university studying for your degree in biology. You need to write a paper. Will you write your paper in in AVE, AAVE, or Standard English? Let's say you're writing a resume to get a job. Would you write your resume in AVE or AAVE, or Standard English? Now let's say you get that job . . . and your work is to do technical writing documenting the features of a new electronic device. Are you going to write your documents in AVE or AAVE?, or will you choose grammatically correct English? Now what if you're writing a legal brief? Or a psychologist writing up a report about a patient? Or a media relations specialist writing a press release?
If AVE and AAVE are equally as proper to use as Standard English, then shouldn't they all be interchangeable? If they're equally correct then why even teach Standard English in school at all in preference of one of the many other vernaculars available?
I initially called your example 'Bad English' (which - quite justifiably - ruffled some feathers) because I was thinking from a corporate/employment/education perspective. In these cases, the use of non-Standard English is certainly an error. Again, the term 'proper' was not intended to denigrate slang/patios/vernacular (I hold nothing against Appalachian, Newfoundlander, Ottawa Valley, or Ebonics speaking brethren), but to differentiate between the form of English as accepted for everything (which you term 'Standard English') and the dialect/vernacular of naturally more limited use.
You would use the standardized English of your particular country in those situations because what variety of language you use depends on the situation. That's what a standardized form of a language is for. On top of that you would use a more formal variety that you wouldn't use with your friends, and you wouldn't use General American English in Australia or vice versa. If you used formal standard English with friends and family it would be really awkward. It's inappropriate in that setting the same way a dialect or informal language is inappropriate in a formal situation.
On top of that, viewing a dialect as "incorrect", especially AAVE, is frequently a tool for discrimination against marginalized groups.
* Does anyone else say out-of-province or is it just us? ROC, please tell me.
When I lived in Atlanta, many people who lived inside the Beltway (highway that circles Atlanta and its inner suburbs) refused to attend parties or doctors or stores or even date someone or generally just travel "OTB" (Outside the Beltway). I seriously never heard so many people consistently use a phrase to represent the geographically undesirable.
Do you say OOP or spell it all out?
Are you sure it's "Beltway" and not "Perimeter"? I've only heard "Beltway" with DC. Whatever you call it, though, I-285 definitely has significance as a perceived cultural boundary in Georgia.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 22, 2021, 01:00:28 PM
Let's say you're in university studying for your degree in biology. You need to write a paper. Will you write your paper in in AVE, AAVE, or Standard English? Let's say you're writing a resume to get a job. Would you write your resume in AVE or AAVE, or Standard English? Now let's say you get that job . . . and your work is to do technical writing documenting the features of a new electronic device. Are you going to write your documents in AVE or AAVE?, or will you choose grammatically correct English? Now what if you're writing a legal brief? Or a psychologist writing up a report about a patient? Or a media relations specialist writing a press release?
If AVE and AAVE are equally as proper to use as Standard English, then shouldn't they all be interchangeable? If they're equally correct then why even teach Standard English in school at all in preference of one of the many other vernaculars available?
I initially called your example 'Bad English' (which - quite justifiably - ruffled some feathers) because I was thinking from a corporate/employment/education perspective. In these cases, the use of non-Standard English is certainly an error. Again, the term 'proper' was not intended to denigrate slang/patios/vernacular (I hold nothing against Appalachian, Newfoundlander, Ottawa Valley, or Ebonics speaking brethren), but to differentiate between the form of English as accepted for everything (which you term 'Standard English') and the dialect/vernacular of naturally more limited use.
You would use the standardized English of your particular country in those situations because what variety of language you use depends on the situation. That's what a standardized form of a language is for. On top of that you would use a more formal variety that you wouldn't use with your friends, and you wouldn't use General American English in Australia or vice versa. If you used formal standard English with friends and family it would be really awkward. It's inappropriate in that setting the same way a dialect or informal language is inappropriate in a formal situation.
This isn't my experience at all.
I use the standard English of my country (which is largely British English) to speak and write all the time . . . whether it's a technical manual, letter to my mom, resume, or speech I've got to give. Because that's what it's for - broad applicability in all cases. It's not awkward at all to use standard English. It's the English that you read in most books and in everything in school. It's the language of the business world. It's how the majority of people who aren't playing a character part will speak in movies and TV shows. If you're using some sort of stilted 'formal' English for your technical writing at work that you wouldn't normally talk with - stop it! Nobody wants or needs that.
Non-standard/informal slang/jargon/vernacular are limited forms of the language with much less applicability - basically limited to informal and poetic usage.
On top of that, viewing a dialect as "incorrect", especially AAVE, is frequently a tool for discrimination against marginalized groups.
This is true with all forms of incorrect speech. It's not limited to marginalized groups or 'AAVE'.
A guy with a thick Newfoundland accent will (at least initially) have trouble getting people to take him seriously. (The guy who taught us aerodynamics at university had a thick Newfie accent and spouted a lot of colloquialisms from his home province - and people always laughed at him in their first class with him. I'm sure that he was taken less seriously because of the way that he spoke.)
I don't believe that my comments about dialects have been unfairly picking on any marginalized group, but please let me know if I have been.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 22, 2021, 01:12:52 PM
* Does anyone else say out-of-province or is it just us? ROC, please tell me.
When I lived in Atlanta, many people who lived inside the Beltway (highway that circles Atlanta and its inner suburbs) refused to attend parties or doctors or stores or even date someone or generally just travel "OTB" (Outside the Beltway). I seriously never heard so many people consistently use a phrase to represent the geographically undesirable.
Do you say OOP or spell it all out?
Say it in full. That university is out of province. And of course for Montrealers, there is Montreal Island and then the rest of the province. I used to live off-island. Didn't matter which direction, just not on the Island.
ROC is Rest Of Canada.
Post by: dougules on June 22, 2021, 01:47:33 PM
You would use the standardized English of your particular country in those situations because what variety of language you use depends on the situation. That's what a standardized form of a language is for. On top of that you would use a more formal variety that you wouldn't use with your friends, and you wouldn't use General American English in Australia or vice versa. If you used formal standard English with friends and family it would be really awkward. It's inappropriate in that setting the same way a dialect or informal language is inappropriate in a formal situation.
This isn't my experience at all.
I use the standard English of my country (which is largely British English) to speak and write all the time . . . whether it's a technical manual, letter to my mom, resume, or speech I've got to give. Because that's what it's for - broad applicability in all cases. It's not awkward at all to use standard English. It's the English that you read in most books and in everything in school. It's the language of the business world. It's how the majority of people who aren't playing a character part will speak in movies and TV shows. If you're using some sort of stilted 'formal' English for your technical writing at work that you wouldn't normally talk with - stop it! Nobody wants or needs that.
Non-standard/informal slang/jargon/vernacular are limited forms of the language with much less applicability - basically limited to informal and poetic usage.On top of that, viewing a dialect as "incorrect", especially AAVE, is frequently a tool for discrimination against marginalized groups.
This is true with all forms of incorrect speech. It's not limited to marginalized groups or 'AAVE'.
A guy with a thick Newfoundland accent will (at least initially) have trouble getting people to take him seriously. (The guy who taught us aerodynamics at university had a thick Newfie accent and spouted a lot of colloquialisms from his home province - and people always laughed at him in their first class with him. I'm sure that he was taken less seriously because of the way that he spoke.)
I don't believe that my comments about dialects have been unfairly picking on any marginalized group, but please let me know if I have been.
If you don't have intuitive experience with using different forms of language in different circumstances, it means that you're part of the privileged group that gets to make their dialect or language the standard. I know you don't mean to be picking on people, but calling someone's dialect "incorrect" is not fair. Laughing at them even more so. It's unfortunate that people from Newfoundland have to learn to speak perfect Standard Canadian English just to be taken seriously. A dialect is essentially a separate language that just hasn't diverged much yet from the dialect considered standard. It has its own rules separate from the standard dialect, and it's tied closely to the identity of the people that speak it. Calling a dialect "incorrect" is just a mild form of the same culture that thought indigenous Canadians would be better off speaking only English.
Post by: Cool Friend on June 22, 2021, 02:56:13 PM
Post by: GuitarStv on June 22, 2021, 03:18:37 PM
If you don't have intuitive experience with using different forms of language in different circumstances, it means that you're part of the privileged group that gets to make their dialect or language the standard.
Sure. I can agree with that.
But you're changing the argument here. You were originally arguing that the Standard English used to write reports at school, compose documents at work, and write resumes was somehow different from the language that is used while talking to family and friends. My point was that this is incorrect. Standard English is appropriate in all places English is used.
Non-standard dialects (of any kind) are not.
I know you don't mean to be picking on people, but calling someone's dialect "incorrect" is not fair.
I'm not sure where fairness comes into things. They're 'incorrect' from the perspective of being deviations from standard English and (as we've established) inappropriate for non-casual usage. Complaining about unfairness in this situation seems like complaining about gravity pulling my feet downward and preventing me from flying around.
Laughing at them even more so. It's unfortunate that people from Newfoundland have to learn to speak perfect Standard Canadian English just to be taken seriously.
They don't.
The guy who taught us aerodynamics was well liked and respected. But the first impression with the thick accent and heavy use of colloquialisms was usually laughter due to difficulty in understanding. This occurred because he didn't learn very good Standard English, instead forcing others to deal with his dialect. (He did write his textbooks in perfect Standard English with no colloquialisms.)
A dialect is essentially a separate language that just hasn't diverged much yet from the dialect considered standard. It has its own rules separate from the standard dialect, and it's tied closely to the identity of the people that speak it.
I like the concept of a dialect as a different language, and it makes sense to me and is a good way of thinking about them. Many languages are closely tied to the identity of the people who speak them.
As an English speaker, it would be weird of me to go to Thailand and expect easy communication / work / concessions while speaking English. The correct thing for me to do would be to learn standard Thai if I was expecting to conduct my business/education there. I'd keep speaking English of course, but that would largely be relegated to the occasions when I was with other English speaking people. To speak English in a setting where Thai is expected would, of course, be incorrect.
Calling a dialect "incorrect" is just a mild form of the same culture that thought indigenous Canadians would be better off speaking only English.
I don't think I'd ever argue that speaking only one language is for the best. Languages help a persons mind develop in a variety of different, beneficial ways. Languages themselves expose a person to wider cultural differences and ways of thinking. Learning more languages is better in pretty much all the cases I can think of.
The white Christians who thought that indigenous Canadians would be better off speaking only English didn't care at all about the English language. They were very clear about their goals - to eradicate native religion and culture to enforce dependence so that they could be controlled more easily. The Canadian government (assisted by Christian churches) went out of their way to build some very specific and horrific ways of going about doing that with impacts that have damaged native communities to this day. The goal didn't have anything to do with correct usage of the English language, or dialects . . . and it's a little odd to see you somehow try to equate the two.
Post by: Paul der Krake on June 22, 2021, 03:22:37 PM
It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.There are state-sponsored institutions the world over whose only job is to determine what is correct or incorrect use of the language they have jurisdiction over.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_language_regulators
They are not exactly shy to tell you when you're wrong.
We can have robust disagreements as to where to draw the line, but the absolutist view is not an easy one to defend.
Post by: Cool Friend on June 22, 2021, 03:49:42 PM
It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.There are state-sponsored institutions the world over whose only job is to determine what is correct or incorrect use of the language they have jurisdiction over.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_language_regulators
They are not exactly shy to tell you when you're wrong.
We can have robust disagreements as to where to draw the line, but the absolutist view is not an easy one to defend.
This does not really address what I said, and that link is not doing the point you seem to be making any favors.
Post by: dougules on June 22, 2021, 04:47:04 PM
If you don't have intuitive experience with using different forms of language in different circumstances, it means that you're part of the privileged group that gets to make their dialect or language the standard.
Sure. I can agree with that.
But you're changing the argument here. You were originally arguing that the Standard English used to write reports at school, compose documents at work, and write resumes was somehow different from the language that is used while talking to family and friends. My point was that this is incorrect. Standard English is appropriate in all places English is used.
Non-standard dialects (of any kind) are not.
You're right that I didn't address that. But I will now. If I were checking a technical document you wrote using the language we're using right now, I would bleed red ink all over it. If I read a technical paper you wrote in language that we're using right now, I would probably be less likely to take you seriously. When you write formal technical documents, you should use formal English which has a lot more influence from Latin, Greek, and Anglo-Norman French. If you feel strongly that that needs to change, then you're feeling a little bit of what it's like to deal with implicit biases against your own dialect.
That does not make the way we're writing right now incorrect, though. It's just informal.
And no, standard English is not appropriate in all places English is used. If you went up to your friends and started speaking in the formal language I was talking about, they'd think you were pretty pompous. Formal English isn't appropriate there, or in other words "incorrect" under the circumstances. In the same way, using standard English could come off wrong in a situation where you should speak in your native dialect. That's about the best I can do to explain it if you don't have any intuitive experience with diglossia.
Quote
Laughing at them even more so. It's unfortunate that people from Newfoundland have to learn to speak perfect Standard Canadian English just to be taken seriously.
They don't.
The guy who taught us aerodynamics was well liked and respected. But the first impression with the thick accent and heavy use of colloquialisms was usually laughter due to difficulty in understanding. This occurred because he didn't learn very good Standard English, instead forcing others to deal with his dialect. (He did write his textbooks in perfect Standard English with no colloquialisms.)
As you said, though, he had a small amount more trouble being taken seriously than if he talked like he had been raised in Toronto. If you hadn't already known he was a respected aerodynamics professor, you might have dismissed his intelligence based on implicit biases about Newfoundlanders. (I honestly don't know how serious the negative stereotype of Newfies is, so that may or may not be a good example.)
Also, give him credit that he's trying to teach you in what amounts to a foreign language. Yes, he should learn better Standard Canadian English if he's going to teach a class in it, the same as a non-native English speaker, but you should recognize you're saying that from a place of being born into the privilege of being a native speaker of the prestige dialect.
Quote
A dialect is essentially a separate language that just hasn't diverged much yet from the dialect considered standard. It has its own rules separate from the standard dialect, and it's tied closely to the identity of the people that speak it.
I like the concept of a dialect as a different language, and it makes sense to me and is a good way of thinking about them. Many languages are closely tied to the identity of the people who speak them.
As an English speaker, it would be weird of me to go to Thailand and expect easy communication / work / concessions while speaking English. The correct thing for me to do would be to learn standard Thai if I was expecting to conduct my business/education there. I'd keep speaking English of course, but that would largely be relegated to the occasions when I was with other English speaking people. To speak English in a setting where Thai is expected would, of course, be incorrect.
Yes totally.
Quote
Calling a dialect "incorrect" is just a mild form of the same culture that thought indigenous Canadians would be better off speaking only English.
I don't think I'd ever argue that speaking only one language is for the best. Languages help a persons mind develop in a variety of different, beneficial ways. Languages themselves expose a person to wider cultural differences and ways of thinking. Learning more languages is better in pretty much all the cases I can think of.
The white Christians who thought that indigenous Canadians would be better off speaking only English didn't care at all about the English language. They were very clear about their goals - to eradicate native religion and culture to enforce dependence so that they could be controlled more easily. The Canadian government (assisted by Christian churches) went out of their way to build some very specific and horrific ways of going about doing that with impacts that have damaged native communities to this day. The goal didn't have anything to do with correct usage of the English language, or dialects . . . and it's a little odd to see you somehow try to equate the two.
There are a lot of similarities to what speakers of AAVE have been through.
But yes those examples are extreme. Nonetheless, people from places like West Virginia still face an uphill battle to be taken as seriously as people like you who were born into learning the prestige dialect of North American English.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on June 22, 2021, 05:23:44 PM
It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.
That's like me saying that because people have different subjective rules of grammar, all the people who enjoy putting the apostrophe in a plural pronoun are not incorrect - just nonstandard.
Post by: Paul der Krake on June 22, 2021, 05:26:52 PM
Not everything has to be seen through the lens of colonial history.It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.There are state-sponsored institutions the world over whose only job is to determine what is correct or incorrect use of the language they have jurisdiction over.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_language_regulators
They are not exactly shy to tell you when you're wrong.
We can have robust disagreements as to where to draw the line, but the absolutist view is not an easy one to defend.
They're also arms of governments that have a long history of colonialist atrocities around the world.
You can see these academies as the tyranny of the majority oppressing a minority, or you can see it as a brave minority taking a stand to protect their own language from the more influential group. It just depends on the situation.
For example: the French academy spends a crazy amount of time "fighting" anglicisms. There are millions of people in France who use the word "digital" the way English speakers understand it, because many French citizens go on the global internet a consume a ton of American content. Many are highly educated and work in tech or whatever, so it bleeds into everyday language. The academy isn't having it, because "digital" means something else entirely in French, you should use "numérique" instead. If you don't, that's incorrect.
Now there is no police that goes around arresting people at night because they used the word incorrectly. But in any situation that matters even just a bit, whether it's crafting legislation, writing papers, giving a public talk, you are expected to know the difference and use the appropriate word. If you don't, people will think less of you. Probably not a lot less, but less.
This isn't about ethnic dominance or cultural assimilation or anything like that. There is no deep-rooted anti-Anglo resentment going back to Joan of Arc. French is the language of the Republic, and its citizens are expected to speak French in the public sphere.
Post by: BlueHouse on June 22, 2021, 07:47:46 PM
* Does anyone else say out-of-province or is it just us? ROC, please tell me.
When I lived in Atlanta, many people who lived inside the Beltway (highway that circles Atlanta and its inner suburbs) refused to attend parties or doctors or stores or even date someone or generally just travel "OTB" (Outside the Beltway). I seriously never heard so many people consistently use a phrase to represent the geographically undesirable.
Do you say OOP or spell it all out?
Are you sure it's "Beltway" and not "Perimeter"? I've only heard "Beltway" with DC. Whatever you call it, though, I-285 definitely has significance as a perceived cultural boundary in Georgia.
[/quote]
Oh gosh, you're right! I live in DC now so that's on my mind. I'm losing my mind.
Post by: Cool Friend on June 22, 2021, 08:12:00 PM
It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.
That's like me saying that because people have different subjective rules of grammar, all the people who enjoy putting the apostrophe in a plural pronoun are not incorrect - just nonstandard.
You’ve confused the idea of a coherent dialect being incorrect (which is what I’m talking about) with individual errors within the framework of that language.
Post by: Metalcat on June 22, 2021, 08:21:03 PM
It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.
That's like me saying that because people have different subjective rules of grammar, all the people who enjoy putting the apostrophe in a plural pronoun are not incorrect - just nonstandard.
You’ve confused the idea of a coherent dialect being incorrect (which is what I’m talking about) with individual errors within the framework of that language.
Exactly. A dialect is different from a pattern of errors within a dialect.
There is such thing as a grammatical error, anyone speaking any dialect can make a grammatical error. Not speaking the dominant dialect is not making an error, it's speaking according to a systematically different set of rules.
Post by: Bloop Bloop Reloaded on June 23, 2021, 01:30:28 AM
It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.
That's like me saying that because people have different subjective rules of grammar, all the people who enjoy putting the apostrophe in a plural pronoun are not incorrect - just nonstandard.
You’ve confused the idea of a coherent dialect being incorrect (which is what I’m talking about) with individual errors within the framework of that language.
Exactly. A dialect is different from a pattern of errors within a dialect.
There is such thing as a grammatical error, anyone speaking any dialect can make a grammatical error. Not speaking the dominant dialect is not making an error, it's speaking according to a systematically different set of rules.
So an African American saying 'ax' can be using AAVE, but a non-black person who pronounces it that way is simply mispronouncing the word?
Post by: Metalcat on June 23, 2021, 05:22:39 AM
It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.
That's like me saying that because people have different subjective rules of grammar, all the people who enjoy putting the apostrophe in a plural pronoun are not incorrect - just nonstandard.
You’ve confused the idea of a coherent dialect being incorrect (which is what I’m talking about) with individual errors within the framework of that language.
Exactly. A dialect is different from a pattern of errors within a dialect.
There is such thing as a grammatical error, anyone speaking any dialect can make a grammatical error. Not speaking the dominant dialect is not making an error, it's speaking according to a systematically different set of rules.
So an African American saying 'ax' can be using AAVE, but a non-black person who pronounces it that way is simply mispronouncing the word?
A person who was raised with and encoded the AAVE dialectical structure and lexicon isn't making a mistake when they use "ax". To be clear, not all AAVE speakers are black. It's called AAVE because it originated with African American slaves, who lived quite separate from white people, hence why their cultural dialect formed so distinctly. Many of their linguistic structures that a lot of Standard English people see as errors are actually based on certain Victorian English structures that died away in most, but not all, white communities over time, but have been preserved in a few dialects.
Hence why someone upthread mentioned Chaucer's use of "ax". AAVE preserves a lot of very old linguistic patterns. It's quite an interesting dialect actually.
A person who was not raised with a dialect where "ax" is part of the structure is making a pronunciation error, because it's not encoded into the dialect that they acquired. Like an older person pronouncing "Google" as "Goggle".
Post by: GuitarStv on June 23, 2021, 06:48:50 AM
You're right that I didn't address that. But I will now. If I were checking a technical document you wrote using the language we're using right now, I would bleed red ink all over it. If I read a technical paper you wrote in language that we're using right now, I would probably be less likely to take you seriously. When you write formal technical documents, you should use formal English which has a lot more influence from Latin, Greek, and Anglo-Norman French. If you feel strongly that that needs to change, then you're feeling a little bit of what it's like to deal with implicit biases against your own dialect.
That does not make the way we're writing right now incorrect, though. It's just informal.
So, I'm a little confused now. The language that I'm using to type at this moment is standard Canadian English (which is largely British English with a few alternate spellings borrowed from America). If I were writing a technical document, a resume, or anything else I would use the same standard English.
You appear to be arguing that a special language exists for writing formal technical documents. That sounds like nonsense to me. The syntax, grammar, and spelling of words is constant between what I'm currently writing and how a technical paper should be written. It's true that I'd probably choose slightly different words from standard English while writing a technical document as context depends . . . but that doesn't change that standard English would be used.
Could you provide an example of language used in technical documents that is not standard English and contrast it to the standard English used in this conversation? Specifically, highlight the areas of grammar, spelling, and syntax which differ. I suspect that you'll find both conform to the rules of standard English.
And no, standard English is not appropriate in all places English is used. If you went up to your friends and started speaking in the formal language I was talking about, they'd think you were pretty pompous. Formal English isn't appropriate there, or in other words "incorrect" under the circumstances. In the same way, using standard English could come off wrong in a situation where you should speak in your native dialect. That's about the best I can do to explain it if you don't have any intuitive experience with diglossia.
Again, I need a better understanding of what 'formal English' is and how it differs from standard English to really respond to this. At first blush it sounds like you're drawing distinctions where none exist though.
As you said, though, he had a small amount more trouble being taken seriously than if he talked like he had been raised in Toronto. If you hadn't already known he was a respected aerodynamics professor, you might have dismissed his intelligence based on implicit biases about Newfoundlanders. (I honestly don't know how serious the negative stereotype of Newfies is, so that may or may not be a good example.)
Also, give him credit that he's trying to teach you in what amounts to a foreign language. Yes, he should learn better Standard Canadian English if he's going to teach a class in it, the same as a non-native English speaker, but you should recognize you're saying that from a place of being born into the privilege of being a native speaker of the prestige dialect.
I don't think that he was fighting against a negative Newfoundlander stereotype as much as he experienced difficulties in expressing himself clearly. And for someone who is in a position where expressing yourself clearly is a vital part of the work, obviously having difficulty doing that indicates a lack of preparation for the work. That was indeed my point. When someone chooses to use a non-standard vernacular inappropriately, this alone is reason for poor first impressions. This doesn't occur because of race/background but because of the choices they've made.
(FWIW, I liked him about as much as any of our other professors - but I tended to skip most lectures and just read the textbook to learn the complicated stuff. :P )
QuoteCalling a dialect "incorrect" is just a mild form of the same culture that thought indigenous Canadians would be better off speaking only English.
I don't think I'd ever argue that speaking only one language is for the best. Languages help a persons mind develop in a variety of different, beneficial ways. Languages themselves expose a person to wider cultural differences and ways of thinking. Learning more languages is better in pretty much all the cases I can think of.
The white Christians who thought that indigenous Canadians would be better off speaking only English didn't care at all about the English language. They were very clear about their goals - to eradicate native religion and culture to enforce dependence so that they could be controlled more easily. The Canadian government (assisted by Christian churches) went out of their way to build some very specific and horrific ways of going about doing that with impacts that have damaged native communities to this day. The goal didn't have anything to do with correct usage of the English language, or dialects . . . and it's a little odd to see you somehow try to equate the two.
There are a lot of similarities to what speakers of AAVE have been through.
But yes those examples are extreme. Nonetheless, people from places like West Virginia still face an uphill battle to be taken as seriously as people like you who were born into learning the prestige dialect of North American English.
Speakers of AAVE didn't experience their hardships because of AAVE, just as native speakers didn't experience their hardships because of their native tongue. This is completely unrelated.
As far as not being taken seriously - I mean, yeah. If you need to convey information in a particular language, not learning the language you need to use correctly tends to create barriers. That's natural and expected.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 23, 2021, 06:57:43 AM
It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.
That's like me saying that because people have different subjective rules of grammar, all the people who enjoy putting the apostrophe in a plural pronoun are not incorrect - just nonstandard.
You’ve confused the idea of a coherent dialect being incorrect (which is what I’m talking about) with individual errors within the framework of that language.
Exactly. A dialect is different from a pattern of errors within a dialect.
There is such thing as a grammatical error, anyone speaking any dialect can make a grammatical error. Not speaking the dominant dialect is not making an error, it's speaking according to a systematically different set of rules.
So an African American saying 'ax' can be using AAVE, but a non-black person who pronounces it that way is simply mispronouncing the word?
A person who was raised with and encoded the AAVE dialectical structure and lexicon isn't making a mistake when they use "ax".
This is half true. They aren't making a mistake if they're using it informally to converse with other people in AAVE. They are making a mistake if they're using it in a situation where standard English is called for.
A person who was not raised with a dialect where "ax" is part of the structure is making a pronunciation error, because it's not encoded into the dialect that they acquired. Like an older person pronouncing "Google" as "Goggle".
Just because something is difficult because of habit, doesn't mean that the incorrect usage is acceptable or correct. The older person is very clearly making a mistake when pronouncing "Google" as "Goggle". Pretending otherwise is a benefit to nobody.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 23, 2021, 09:38:14 AM
I don't diss millennials and Gen X/Y/Z/whatever label is in popular usage now. You ignore how much life has changed since Boomers were young. We have had to deal with masses of linguistic change, social change, and technological change.
Rant over.
Post by: dougules on June 23, 2021, 10:47:06 AM
Not everything has to be seen through the lens of colonial history.It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.There are state-sponsored institutions the world over whose only job is to determine what is correct or incorrect use of the language they have jurisdiction over.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_language_regulators
They are not exactly shy to tell you when you're wrong.
We can have robust disagreements as to where to draw the line, but the absolutist view is not an easy one to defend.
They're also arms of governments that have a long history of colonialist atrocities around the world.
You can see these academies as the tyranny of the majority oppressing a minority, or you can see it as a brave minority taking a stand to protect their own language from the more influential group. It just depends on the situation.
For example: the French academy spends a crazy amount of time "fighting" anglicisms. There are millions of people in France who use the word "digital" the way English speakers understand it, because many French citizens go on the global internet a consume a ton of American content. Many are highly educated and work in tech or whatever, so it bleeds into everyday language. The academy isn't having it, because "digital" means something else entirely in French, you should use "numérique" instead. If you don't, that's incorrect.
Now there is no police that goes around arresting people at night because they used the word incorrectly. But in any situation that matters even just a bit, whether it's crafting legislation, writing papers, giving a public talk, you are expected to know the difference and use the appropriate word. If you don't, people will think less of you. Probably not a lot less, but less.
This isn't about ethnic dominance or cultural assimilation or anything like that. There is no deep-rooted anti-Anglo resentment going back to Joan of Arc. French is the language of the Republic, and its citizens are expected to speak French in the public sphere.
No, not everything can be viewed through the lens of colonial history, but this can. It's good to have a standard language and regulate it like you would weights and measures, but not to the detriment of minority languages and dialects. I'm happy that the French are defending their language against the onslaught of English, but at the same they are pushing standard French on people whose native language is not standard French. French isn't historically the language of the republic, just the language of the region around Paris. The Bretons and the Basque traditionally speak completely different languages. A lot of other regions of France have or had dialects or separate languages that are related to, but not the same as, standard French. France is a particularly good example because they were long-standing hold outs against minority language rights. It's ironic when they're the first to be upset about the hegemony of English.
Post by: Metalcat on June 23, 2021, 12:24:47 PM
It's not just unfair to call it "incorrect." There are appropriate and inappropriate contexts in which to use any number of dialects, determined by explicit or implicit social code and convention. But there is no such thing as an incorrect language.
That's like me saying that because people have different subjective rules of grammar, all the people who enjoy putting the apostrophe in a plural pronoun are not incorrect - just nonstandard.
You’ve confused the idea of a coherent dialect being incorrect (which is what I’m talking about) with individual errors within the framework of that language.
Exactly. A dialect is different from a pattern of errors within a dialect.
There is such thing as a grammatical error, anyone speaking any dialect can make a grammatical error. Not speaking the dominant dialect is not making an error, it's speaking according to a systematically different set of rules.
So an African American saying 'ax' can be using AAVE, but a non-black person who pronounces it that way is simply mispronouncing the word?
A person who was raised with and encoded the AAVE dialectical structure and lexicon isn't making a mistake when they use "ax".
This is half true. They aren't making a mistake if they're using it informally to converse with other people in AAVE. They are making a mistake if they're using it in a situation where standard English is called for.A person who was not raised with a dialect where "ax" is part of the structure is making a pronunciation error, because it's not encoded into the dialect that they acquired. Like an older person pronouncing "Google" as "Goggle".
Just because something is difficult because of habit, doesn't mean that the incorrect usage is acceptable or correct. The older person is very clearly making a mistake when pronouncing "Google" as "Goggle". Pretending otherwise is a benefit to nobody.
Again, I will agree to disagree with you.
Fluency in Standard English is required for a lot of jobs, that's true, but it doesn't make the person's native dialect or language wrong, it just makes it inappropriate for the context.
A lot of language and verbal content isn't appropriate in many professional contexts, that doesn't make them grammatically wrong.
"Suck my fucking smelly ball sack" is perfectly good Standard English, but not appropriate for most workplaces. It's grammatically fine though. Speaking Portuguese to English speaking customers is also not appropriate, but it's not grammatically wrong. And speaking AAVE may be considered inappropriate, but it too, is not grammatically wrong.
Yes, most native AAVE speakers will have to learn fluency in Standard English in order to be able to use the expected dialect of their chosen profession, just like anyone else whose native dialect or language isn't Standard English.
That's not the same as saying that their native dialect is wrong and riddled with grammatical errors.
Post by: dougules on June 23, 2021, 12:32:37 PM
You're right that I didn't address that. But I will now. If I were checking a technical document you wrote using the language we're using right now, I would bleed red ink all over it. If I read a technical paper you wrote in language that we're using right now, I would probably be less likely to take you seriously. When you write formal technical documents, you should use formal English which has a lot more influence from Latin, Greek, and Anglo-Norman French. If you feel strongly that that needs to change, then you're feeling a little bit of what it's like to deal with implicit biases against your own dialect.
That does not make the way we're writing right now incorrect, though. It's just informal.
So, I'm a little confused now. The language that I'm using to type at this moment is standard Canadian English (which is largely British English with a few alternate spellings borrowed from America). If I were writing a technical document, a resume, or anything else I would use the same standard English.
You appear to be arguing that a special language exists for writing formal technical documents. That sounds like nonsense to me. The syntax, grammar, and spelling of words is constant between what I'm currently writing and how a technical paper should be written. It's true that I'd probably choose slightly different words from standard English while writing a technical document as context depends . . . but that doesn't change that standard English would be used.
Could you provide an example of language used in technical documents that is not standard English and contrast it to the standard English used in this conversation? Specifically, highlight the areas of grammar, spelling, and syntax which differ. I suspect that you'll find both conform to the rules of standard English.And no, standard English is not appropriate in all places English is used. If you went up to your friends and started speaking in the formal language I was talking about, they'd think you were pretty pompous. Formal English isn't appropriate there, or in other words "incorrect" under the circumstances. In the same way, using standard English could come off wrong in a situation where you should speak in your native dialect. That's about the best I can do to explain it if you don't have any intuitive experience with diglossia.
Again, I need a better understanding of what 'formal English' is and how it differs from standard English to really respond to this. At first blush it sounds like you're drawing distinctions where none exist though.
Standard may not be the best term. I don't know about Canada, but there is no official standard in the US. Unofficially, General American is the standard. There are formal and informal registers of that dialect of English. What we're writing right now is in the informal register. The formal register is, in some respects, a separate language used to write formal documents. In the formal register you would not use contractions, and you would generally prefer words with Latin or Greek roots (so called big words). You'd also tend to not use Germanic phrasal verbs. You wouldn't say things like "turn off" or "hook up". You would use words and phrases like "de-energize", "remove power", or "connect". At one point in English history, the English language was not used in any capacity in formal settings. Modern English speakers still maintain that dichotomy to an extent by using vocabulary and phrasing derived from Anglo-Norman French, Latin, and Greek in formal situations where the informal register would employ vocabulary and phrasing derived from Anglo-Saxon roots. At this point in history it may be appropriate to abandon use of the formal register. However, a writer who uses the informal register in formal writing still incurs the risk of being judged negatively based on the implicit biases of the reader. I'm guessing you can see I moved between registers at points?
I'll have to answer the rest of it later. I've only got so much time and energy for writing linguistic treatises.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 23, 2021, 12:41:43 PM
This seems to work. I have seen beautifully written papers where, going by names and affiliations, most if not all of the authors are writing in their second (3rd? 4th?) language. Formal English may actually be easier to write than casual English, at least as a second language, because the rules are much more precise.
Post by: DadJokes on June 23, 2021, 01:06:28 PM
Post by: Metalcat on June 23, 2021, 01:12:52 PM
Let's continue this argument for another 50 responses and see if anyone's mind is changed by then!
Well, no one is adding funny examples of stupid shit people say.
I'll add one though, I don't wish it would go away, but it's funny. My father says of his covid vaccine that he "got the stab" instead of jab. It makes me laugh every time.
Post by: OtherJen on June 23, 2021, 04:47:53 PM
Scientific papers have their own linguistic requirements. First, they are written in passive voice. "I" never do anything. The locations were chosen and the sites were sampled. Second, as mentioned above, they are formal. Technical terms, methodology, everything written out in full. In Biology, Genus and species are set formats. Literature Cited is formal and journal dependent.
This seems to work. I have seen beautifully written papers where, going by names and affiliations, most if not all of the authors are writing in their second (3rd? 4th?) language. Formal English may actually be easier to write than casual English, at least as a second language, because the rules are much more precise.
I'm a full-time medical/life science editor (and manager of other editors) and work almost exclusively with manuscripts and research proposals written by non-native English-speaking researchers. There's no set rule on voice, and in fact some journals prefer active voice.
Many of the papers written by authors in second (or higher-ordinal) languages have been edited (sometimes heavily) to improve grammar, syntax, word choice, and organizational structure by people like me. It's a privilege to be entrusted with their work and to help them communicate it using English-language norms in the field.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 23, 2021, 05:22:51 PM
Scientific papers have their own linguistic requirements. First, they are written in passive voice. "I" never do anything. The locations were chosen and the sites were sampled. Second, as mentioned above, they are formal. Technical terms, methodology, everything written out in full. In Biology, Genus and species are set formats. Literature Cited is formal and journal dependent.
This seems to work. I have seen beautifully written papers where, going by names and affiliations, most if not all of the authors are writing in their second (3rd? 4th?) language. Formal English may actually be easier to write than casual English, at least as a second language, because the rules are much more precise.
I'm a full-time medical/life science editor (and manager of other editors) and work almost exclusively with manuscripts and research proposals written by non-native English-speaking researchers. There's no set rule on voice, and in fact some journals prefer active voice.
Many of the papers written by authors in second (or higher-ordinal) languages have been edited (sometimes heavily) to improve grammar, syntax, word choice, and organizational structure by people like me. It's a privilege to be entrusted with their work and to help them communicate it using English-language norms in the field.
I guess it depends on the field. The journals I read when I was working were almost all in passive voice.
I always wondered about the editing. I think some of the native English speakers could have used more editing. I know how hard it is, since I used to help students write Honours undergrad theses. They were shocked at the amount of editing they had to do. Good writing doesn't just happen.
Post by: DadJokes on June 24, 2021, 05:26:47 AM
Scientific papers have their own linguistic requirements. First, they are written in passive voice. "I" never do anything. The locations were chosen and the sites were sampled. Second, as mentioned above, they are formal. Technical terms, methodology, everything written out in full. In Biology, Genus and species are set formats. Literature Cited is formal and journal dependent.
This seems to work. I have seen beautifully written papers where, going by names and affiliations, most if not all of the authors are writing in their second (3rd? 4th?) language. Formal English may actually be easier to write than casual English, at least as a second language, because the rules are much more precise.
I'm a full-time medical/life science editor (and manager of other editors) and work almost exclusively with manuscripts and research proposals written by non-native English-speaking researchers. There's no set rule on voice, and in fact some journals prefer active voice.
Many of the papers written by authors in second (or higher-ordinal) languages have been edited (sometimes heavily) to improve grammar, syntax, word choice, and organizational structure by people like me. It's a privilege to be entrusted with their work and to help them communicate it using English-language norms in the field.
I guess it depends on the field. The journals I read when I was working were almost all in passive voice.
I always wondered about the editing. I think some of the native English speakers could have used more editing. I know how hard it is, since I used to help students write Honours undergrad theses. They were shocked at the amount of editing they had to do. Good writing doesn't just happen.
In audit reports, we use active voice.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 24, 2021, 06:18:42 AM
Scientific papers have their own linguistic requirements. First, they are written in passive voice. "I" never do anything. The locations were chosen and the sites were sampled. Second, as mentioned above, they are formal. Technical terms, methodology, everything written out in full. In Biology, Genus and species are set formats. Literature Cited is formal and journal dependent.
This seems to work. I have seen beautifully written papers where, going by names and affiliations, most if not all of the authors are writing in their second (3rd? 4th?) language. Formal English may actually be easier to write than casual English, at least as a second language, because the rules are much more precise.
I'm a full-time medical/life science editor (and manager of other editors) and work almost exclusively with manuscripts and research proposals written by non-native English-speaking researchers. There's no set rule on voice, and in fact some journals prefer active voice.
Many of the papers written by authors in second (or higher-ordinal) languages have been edited (sometimes heavily) to improve grammar, syntax, word choice, and organizational structure by people like me. It's a privilege to be entrusted with their work and to help them communicate it using English-language norms in the field.
I guess it depends on the field. The journals I read when I was working were almost all in passive voice.
I always wondered about the editing. I think some of the native English speakers could have used more editing. I know how hard it is, since I used to help students write Honours undergrad theses. They were shocked at the amount of editing they had to do. Good writing doesn't just happen.
In audit reports, we use active voice.
You are lucky, passive voice is hard.
And that shows that for good communication the writer needs to know what the audience is expecting.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 24, 2021, 07:38:48 AM
You're right that I didn't address that. But I will now. If I were checking a technical document you wrote using the language we're using right now, I would bleed red ink all over it. If I read a technical paper you wrote in language that we're using right now, I would probably be less likely to take you seriously. When you write formal technical documents, you should use formal English which has a lot more influence from Latin, Greek, and Anglo-Norman French. If you feel strongly that that needs to change, then you're feeling a little bit of what it's like to deal with implicit biases against your own dialect.
That does not make the way we're writing right now incorrect, though. It's just informal.
So, I'm a little confused now. The language that I'm using to type at this moment is standard Canadian English (which is largely British English with a few alternate spellings borrowed from America). If I were writing a technical document, a resume, or anything else I would use the same standard English.
You appear to be arguing that a special language exists for writing formal technical documents. That sounds like nonsense to me. The syntax, grammar, and spelling of words is constant between what I'm currently writing and how a technical paper should be written. It's true that I'd probably choose slightly different words from standard English while writing a technical document as context depends . . . but that doesn't change that standard English would be used.
Could you provide an example of language used in technical documents that is not standard English and contrast it to the standard English used in this conversation? Specifically, highlight the areas of grammar, spelling, and syntax which differ. I suspect that you'll find both conform to the rules of standard English.And no, standard English is not appropriate in all places English is used. If you went up to your friends and started speaking in the formal language I was talking about, they'd think you were pretty pompous. Formal English isn't appropriate there, or in other words "incorrect" under the circumstances. In the same way, using standard English could come off wrong in a situation where you should speak in your native dialect. That's about the best I can do to explain it if you don't have any intuitive experience with diglossia.
Again, I need a better understanding of what 'formal English' is and how it differs from standard English to really respond to this. At first blush it sounds like you're drawing distinctions where none exist though.
Standard may not be the best term. I don't know about Canada, but there is no official standard in the US. Unofficially, General American is the standard. There are formal and informal registers of that dialect of English. What we're writing right now is in the informal register. The formal register is, in some respects, a separate language used to write formal documents. In the formal register you would not use contractions, and you would generally prefer words with Latin or Greek roots (so called big words). You'd also tend to not use Germanic phrasal verbs. You wouldn't say things like "turn off" or "hook up". You would use words and phrases like "de-energize", "remove power", or "connect". At one point in English history, the English language was not used in any capacity in formal settings. Modern English speakers still maintain that dichotomy to an extent by using vocabulary and phrasing derived from Anglo-Norman French, Latin, and Greek in formal situations where the informal register would employ vocabulary and phrasing derived from Anglo-Saxon roots. At this point in history it may be appropriate to abandon use of the formal register. However, a writer who uses the informal register in formal writing still incurs the risk of being judged negatively based on the implicit biases of the reader. I'm guessing you can see I moved between registers at points?
I'll have to answer the rest of it later. I've only got so much time and energy for writing linguistic treatises.
I have used and will continue to use 'turn off' over 'de-energize' while writing a technical manual. Technical instruction is about clarity, which impacts word choice. For example, if a device has an 'off' switch, 'de-energize' becomes confusing. Does 'de-energize' mean removing the power cable from the device? Does it mean draining the battery? Does it mean discharging the capacitors? You can mark it up in red pen all you like, but use of 'de-energize' terminology would cause customer support to have to answer questions about what is meant it seems like an odd choice to use it.
Typically I will write technical manuals in passive voice, which wouldn't be used for informal conversation though.
But regardless choice of vocabulary or voice used (both largely stylistic choices) - I'm still using standard English for both. I'm still following the rules of standard English grammar for both. The spelling and pronunciation of the words is the same. There's no separate 'technical writing' dialect.
Post by: Jouer on June 24, 2021, 09:17:57 AM
Quote
The guy who taught us aerodynamics was well liked and respected. But the first impression with the thick accent and heavy use of colloquialisms was usually laughter due to difficulty in understanding. This occurred because he didn't learn very good Standard English, instead forcing others to deal with his dialect. (He did write his textbooks in perfect Standard English with no colloquialisms.)
When some of us leave Newfoundland, we choose to change our speaking a little so the slow mainlanders can understand us. ;-) Sounds like your prof didn't feel like doing that.
We all learned "proper English" which is why your prof used it in writing. But using it in speech is lame in our culture. Having said that, we are well aware that our grammar is shit. Some of us are fighting an uphill battle.
Post by: Paul der Krake on June 24, 2021, 09:50:28 AM
Incorrect hat usage, or non-standard cultural artifact?
Discuss.
Post by: DadJokes on June 24, 2021, 09:52:06 AM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c5/5b/73/c55b73d72054ba5a3f21b0363be699c0.png)
Incorrect hat usage, or non-standard cultural artifact?
Discuss.
That's clearly there to collect water if it rains.
Post by: Metalcat on June 24, 2021, 09:54:00 AM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c5/5b/73/c55b73d72054ba5a3f21b0363be699c0.png)
Incorrect hat usage, or non-standard cultural artifact?
Discuss.
That's clearly there to collect water if it rains.
Or stores his snacks there
Post by: dougules on June 24, 2021, 11:46:01 AM
Standard may not be the best term. I don't know about Canada, but there is no official standard in the US. Unofficially, General American is the standard. There are formal and informal registers of that dialect of English. What we're writing right now is in the informal register. The formal register is, in some respects, a separate language used to write formal documents. In the formal register you would not use contractions, and you would generally prefer words with Latin or Greek roots (so called big words). You'd also tend to not use Germanic phrasal verbs. You wouldn't say things like "turn off" or "hook up". You would use words and phrases like "de-energize", "remove power", or "connect". At one point in English history, the English language was not used in any capacity in formal settings. Modern English speakers still maintain that dichotomy to an extent by using vocabulary and phrasing derived from Anglo-Norman French, Latin, and Greek in formal situations where the informal register would employ vocabulary and phrasing derived from Anglo-Saxon roots. At this point in history it may be appropriate to abandon use of the formal register. However, a writer who uses the informal register in formal writing still incurs the risk of being judged negatively based on the implicit biases of the reader. I'm guessing you can see I moved between registers at points?
I'll have to answer the rest of it later. I've only got so much time and energy for writing linguistic treatises.
I have used and will continue to use 'turn off' over 'de-energize' while writing a technical manual. Technical instruction is about clarity, which impacts word choice. For example, if a device has an 'off' switch, 'de-energize' becomes confusing. Does 'de-energize' mean removing the power cable from the device? Does it mean draining the battery? Does it mean discharging the capacitors? You can mark it up in red pen all you like, but use of 'de-energize' terminology would cause customer support to have to answer questions about what is meant it seems like an odd choice to use it.
Typically I will write technical manuals in passive voice, which wouldn't be used for informal conversation though.
But regardless choice of vocabulary or voice used (both largely stylistic choices) - I'm still using standard English for both. I'm still following the rules of standard English grammar for both. The spelling and pronunciation of the words is the same. There's no separate 'technical writing' dialect.
Writing instructions for people to follow is different from writing a report which needs more formal language. A previous job involved a decent amount of report writing, and there would be a lot of red ink on the page if there was too much informal wording in the report. If you don't have to deal with that, lucky you. The strong distinction between colloquial and formal English probably should go away, but it's not dead yet for people that write formal documents.
I don't think you have any good reference point for using different forms of language in different settings, but for a lot of people who aren't native speakers of the prestige dialect of a major world language, that is the reality. A lot of people who speak regional dialects don't necessarily understand it in those terms, either, and have internalized that their native dialect is bad or incorrect.
QuoteThe guy who taught us aerodynamics was well liked and respected. But the first impression with the thick accent and heavy use of colloquialisms was usually laughter due to difficulty in understanding. This occurred because he didn't learn very good Standard English, instead forcing others to deal with his dialect. (He did write his textbooks in perfect Standard English with no colloquialisms.)
When some of us leave Newfoundland, we choose to change our speaking a little so the slow mainlanders can understand us. ;-) Sounds like your prof didn't feel like doing that.
We all learned "proper English" which is why your prof used it in writing. But using it in speech is lame in our culture. Having said that, we are well aware that our grammar is shit. Some of us are fighting an uphill battle.
Your grammar isn't bad English. It's correct Newfoundland English. It's basically just a different language from Standard Canadian English in the same way that French is, even if it's still close enough that people from other parts of Anglo-Canada can mostly understand you. If people can't understand you when you talk fast, it's a language barrier the same as if you were speaking French. It's good to learn how to speak Standard Canadian English, but treat it as a foreign language the same as if you were learning Spanish to speak to people in Mexico.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 24, 2021, 11:49:06 AM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c5/5b/73/c55b73d72054ba5a3f21b0363be699c0.png)
Incorrect hat usage, or non-standard cultural artifact?
Discuss.
That's clearly there to collect water if it rains.
Or stores his snacks there
There is a man who listens to Nickleback.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 24, 2021, 11:58:08 AM
Standard may not be the best term. I don't know about Canada, but there is no official standard in the US. Unofficially, General American is the standard. There are formal and informal registers of that dialect of English. What we're writing right now is in the informal register. The formal register is, in some respects, a separate language used to write formal documents. In the formal register you would not use contractions, and you would generally prefer words with Latin or Greek roots (so called big words). You'd also tend to not use Germanic phrasal verbs. You wouldn't say things like "turn off" or "hook up". You would use words and phrases like "de-energize", "remove power", or "connect". At one point in English history, the English language was not used in any capacity in formal settings. Modern English speakers still maintain that dichotomy to an extent by using vocabulary and phrasing derived from Anglo-Norman French, Latin, and Greek in formal situations where the informal register would employ vocabulary and phrasing derived from Anglo-Saxon roots. At this point in history it may be appropriate to abandon use of the formal register. However, a writer who uses the informal register in formal writing still incurs the risk of being judged negatively based on the implicit biases of the reader. I'm guessing you can see I moved between registers at points?
I'll have to answer the rest of it later. I've only got so much time and energy for writing linguistic treatises.
I have used and will continue to use 'turn off' over 'de-energize' while writing a technical manual. Technical instruction is about clarity, which impacts word choice. For example, if a device has an 'off' switch, 'de-energize' becomes confusing. Does 'de-energize' mean removing the power cable from the device? Does it mean draining the battery? Does it mean discharging the capacitors? You can mark it up in red pen all you like, but use of 'de-energize' terminology would cause customer support to have to answer questions about what is meant it seems like an odd choice to use it.
Typically I will write technical manuals in passive voice, which wouldn't be used for informal conversation though.
But regardless choice of vocabulary or voice used (both largely stylistic choices) - I'm still using standard English for both. I'm still following the rules of standard English grammar for both. The spelling and pronunciation of the words is the same. There's no separate 'technical writing' dialect.
Writing instructions for people to follow is different from writing a report which needs more formal language. A previous job involved a decent amount of report writing, and there would be a lot of red ink on the page if there was too much informal wording in the report. If you don't have to deal with that, lucky you. The strong distinction between colloquial and formal English probably should go away, but it's not dead yet for people that write formal documents.
I don't think you have any good reference point for using different forms of language in different settings, but for a lot of people who aren't native speakers of the prestige dialect of a major world language, that is the reality. A lot of people who speak regional dialects don't necessarily understand it in those terms, either, and have internalized that their native dialect is bad or incorrect.
I have no reference point for using different forms of English in different settings.
I grew up in Northern Ontario so have had plenty of occasion to speak my heavily accented and poor French and alternate back and forth with English. I don't always understand terms in French and often need to try several times to get my point across. I'm certainly aware of what that's like. If the need to regularly communicate in French came up I'd have to spend more time to learn it properly (and would not argue that the Franglaise I grew up around that is so common in Northern Ontario should be reverentially treated).
Post by: nereo on June 24, 2021, 06:19:44 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c5/5b/73/c55b73d72054ba5a3f21b0363be699c0.png)
Incorrect hat usage, or non-standard cultural artifact?
Discuss.
Can we discuss the hair? Because I’m pretty sure it’s either in-correct or non-standard. Either way it’s likely to deflect projectiles and could possibly inflict harm during a physical altercation.
Post by: calimom on June 24, 2021, 09:37:15 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c5/5b/73/c55b73d72054ba5a3f21b0363be699c0.png)
Incorrect hat usage, or non-standard cultural artifact?
Discuss.
Can we discuss the hair? Because I’m pretty sure it’s either in-correct or non-standard. Either way it’s likely to deflect projectiles and could possibly inflict harm during a physical altercation.
There's quite a commitment to the hair. He looks like the kind of person who will refer to his second cousin once removed as a 'heroine addict'.
Post by: Dicey on June 26, 2021, 07:39:08 AM
Could we stop with the ageism please? Those of us who use Google know how to say it. Although given what turns up sometimes, I am tempted to pronounce it "Giggle". And sometimes "Goggle" is totally appropriate. As in, I am goggling at the pathetic nonsense Google has turned up.+ 63.
I don't diss millennials and Gen X/Y/Z/whatever label is in popular usage now. You ignore how much life has changed since Boomers were young. We have had to deal with masses of linguistic change, social change, and technological change.
Rant over.
Post by: Metalcat on June 26, 2021, 08:02:27 AM
Could we stop with the ageism please? Those of us who use Google know how to say it. Although given what turns up sometimes, I am tempted to pronounce it "Giggle". And sometimes "Goggle" is totally appropriate. As in, I am goggling at the pathetic nonsense Google has turned up.
I don't diss millennials and Gen X/Y/Z/whatever label is in popular usage now. You ignore how much life has changed since Boomers were young. We have had to deal with masses of linguistic change, social change, and technological change.
Rant over.
I did not mean to be ageist. I used the example because it was the first one that popped into my head. I've had a number of older patients tell me they looked something up on "Goggle".
My apologies to anyone who found the example offensive.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 26, 2021, 08:27:49 AM
Could we stop with the ageism please? Those of us who use Google know how to say it. Although given what turns up sometimes, I am tempted to pronounce it "Giggle". And sometimes "Goggle" is totally appropriate. As in, I am goggling at the pathetic nonsense Google has turned up.
I don't diss millennials and Gen X/Y/Z/whatever label is in popular usage now. You ignore how much life has changed since Boomers were young. We have had to deal with masses of linguistic change, social change, and technological change.
Rant over.
I did not mean to be ageist. I used the example because it was the first one that popped into my head. I've had a number of older patients tell me they looked something up on "Goggle".
My apologies to anyone who found the example offensive.
More irritatated than offended.
I see so many posts that are ageist that I have started calling them out. Yes, most are unintentionally ageist, but they are unintentionally ageist because agism is usually an invisible "ism" in a way that racism and sexism aren't. And I include all age groups in this, why are "Millenial this" and "Boomer that" headlines acceptable? Substitute a race for the age group and see how the headline or comment reads. If it still reads fine, ok. If it is suddenly bad, it was ageist.
Post by: Metalcat on June 26, 2021, 08:51:57 AM
Could we stop with the ageism please? Those of us who use Google know how to say it. Although given what turns up sometimes, I am tempted to pronounce it "Giggle". And sometimes "Goggle" is totally appropriate. As in, I am goggling at the pathetic nonsense Google has turned up.
I don't diss millennials and Gen X/Y/Z/whatever label is in popular usage now. You ignore how much life has changed since Boomers were young. We have had to deal with masses of linguistic change, social change, and technological change.
Rant over.
I did not mean to be ageist. I used the example because it was the first one that popped into my head. I've had a number of older patients tell me they looked something up on "Goggle".
My apologies to anyone who found the example offensive.
More irritatated than offended.
I see so many posts that are ageist that I have started calling them out. Yes, most are unintentionally ageist, but they are unintentionally ageist because agism is usually an invisible "ism" in a way that racism and sexism aren't. And I include all age groups in this, why are "Millenial this" and "Boomer that" headlines acceptable? Substitute a race for the age group and see how the headline or comment reads. If it still reads fine, ok. If it is suddenly bad, it was ageist.
You're right. There was no need for me to specify age in giving an example of a real grammatical/pronunciation error compared to someone speaking a different dialect. Totally unnecessary. I'm okay being called out.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 26, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Could we stop with the ageism please? Those of us who use Google know how to say it. Although given what turns up sometimes, I am tempted to pronounce it "Giggle". And sometimes "Goggle" is totally appropriate. As in, I am goggling at the pathetic nonsense Google has turned up.
I don't diss millennials and Gen X/Y/Z/whatever label is in popular usage now. You ignore how much life has changed since Boomers were young. We have had to deal with masses of linguistic change, social change, and technological change.
Rant over.
I did not mean to be ageist. I used the example because it was the first one that popped into my head. I've had a number of older patients tell me they looked something up on "Goggle".
My apologies to anyone who found the example offensive.
More irritatated than offended.
I see so many posts that are ageist that I have started calling them out. Yes, most are unintentionally ageist, but they are unintentionally ageist because agism is usually an invisible "ism" in a way that racism and sexism aren't. And I include all age groups in this, why are "Millenial this" and "Boomer that" headlines acceptable? Substitute a race for the age group and see how the headline or comment reads. If it still reads fine, ok. If it is suddenly bad, it was ageist.
You're right. There was no need for me to specify age in giving an example of a real grammatical/pronunciation error compared to someone speaking a different dialect. Totally unnecessary. I'm okay being called out.
If no one ever calls anyone else out, we will all continue on our merry ways.
I've tried to find the Trudeau pere quote about girls/ladies/women and failed. It was very telling in its day.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 26, 2021, 03:34:03 PM
We've got bad hearts on both sides of the family among the men, and a history of dementia. Even if I make it that long, I'm not gonna understand what they're saying about me. :P
Post by: frugalnacho on July 07, 2021, 11:22:56 AM
No idea how he came up with it. He's only 3 so he doesn't even know what a contraction is, but he willn't stop using it.
Post by: Cool Friend on July 07, 2021, 11:36:06 AM
Post by: nessness on July 07, 2021, 11:56:52 AM
My 3 year old son has created a new contraction and shortened "will not" to "willn't". We keep correcting him and telling him it's "will not" or "won't" and willn't isn't a word, but he uses it incessantly. It's driving mrs nacho crazy, but I think it's kind of funny.Ha - I love little-kid-isms. I'm a little sad that my kids (now 4 and 6) no longer have so many.
No idea how he came up with it. He's only 3 so he doesn't even know what a contraction is, but he willn't stop using it.
When my younger daughter was 3, she referred to all times in the past as "lasterday", which I actually thought was a better word than "yesterday." 😄
Post by: zolotiyeruki on July 07, 2021, 12:00:47 PM
Post by: Metalcat on July 07, 2021, 12:05:05 PM
I kinda wish "amn't" were a real contraction, as in "I amn't going!"
That's basically what "ain't" is, if you say "amn't" quickly, it sounds like "ain't".
Post by: shelivesthedream on July 07, 2021, 01:44:24 PM
Post by: Paul der Krake on July 07, 2021, 02:48:06 PM
"Adopt" a dog or cat, when they mean "purchase at full price from a commercial breeder". No, you bought a dog/cat.I used to work for an employer that had a very large, very active email list of employees buying and selling things. One day someone tried to find someone to adopt their dog that just wasn't working for their family. I don't know anything about dogs and am fuzzy on the details, but it was considered a fancy breed. For the adoption to go through they merely asked for a "rehoming fee" of $2,000.
Post by: windytrail on July 07, 2021, 02:57:11 PM
"Adopt" a dog or cat, when they mean "purchase at full price from a commercial breeder". No, you bought a dog/cat.Or, "[he/she] adopted me."
One of the other tenants in my building gets pet food/meds delivered. The box says something along the lines of, "medication for pet parents." Implication is that you do not own your dog anymore, rather it is like a child.
Post by: Travis on July 08, 2021, 07:45:29 AM
My 3 year old son has created a new contraction and shortened "will not" to "willn't". We keep correcting him and telling him it's "will not" or "won't" and willn't isn't a word, but he uses it incessantly. It's driving mrs nacho crazy, but I think it's kind of funny.
No idea how he came up with it. He's only 3 so he doesn't even know what a contraction is, but he willn't stop using it.
Can you really blame him? He combined two words like any other English contraction. It's not his fault that the recognized contraction for will not makes no sense.
Post by: shelivesthedream on July 08, 2021, 02:53:52 PM
My 3 year old son has created a new contraction and shortened "will not" to "willn't". We keep correcting him and telling him it's "will not" or "won't" and willn't isn't a word, but he uses it incessantly. It's driving mrs nacho crazy, but I think it's kind of funny.
No idea how he came up with it. He's only 3 so he doesn't even know what a contraction is, but he willn't stop using it.
We're going through a series of adorable past tense isms with our 3yo. "Mummy, she tookened it away!" "She has gonned to bed." I love watching him learn rules and misapply them. He's so right...except for the bit where he's wrong. But the PROCESS is there, not just rote learning.
Post by: GuitarStv on July 08, 2021, 03:39:08 PM
My 3 year old son has created a new contraction and shortened "will not" to "willn't". We keep correcting him and telling him it's "will not" or "won't" and willn't isn't a word, but he uses it incessantly. It's driving mrs nacho crazy, but I think it's kind of funny.
No idea how he came up with it. He's only 3 so he doesn't even know what a contraction is, but he willn't stop using it.
We're going through a series of adorable past tense isms with our 3yo. "Mummy, she tookened it away!" "She has gonned to bed." I love watching him learn rules and misapply them. He's so right...except for the bit where he's wrong. But the PROCESS is there, not just rote learning.
Sometimes it feels like English is 50% rule based and 50% memorization of when to break the rules.
Post by: Travis on July 08, 2021, 06:38:12 PM
My 3 year old son has created a new contraction and shortened "will not" to "willn't". We keep correcting him and telling him it's "will not" or "won't" and willn't isn't a word, but he uses it incessantly. It's driving mrs nacho crazy, but I think it's kind of funny.
No idea how he came up with it. He's only 3 so he doesn't even know what a contraction is, but he willn't stop using it.
We're going through a series of adorable past tense isms with our 3yo. "Mummy, she tookened it away!" "She has gonned to bed." I love watching him learn rules and misapply them. He's so right...except for the bit where he's wrong. But the PROCESS is there, not just rote learning.
Sometimes it feels like English is 50% rule based and 50% memorization of when to break the rules.
Agreed. Didn't we have a conversation a few pages back about how written proper English just sounds weird when you say it which is why nobody does it?
Post by: Metalcat on July 08, 2021, 07:39:10 PM
My 3 year old son has created a new contraction and shortened "will not" to "willn't". We keep correcting him and telling him it's "will not" or "won't" and willn't isn't a word, but he uses it incessantly. It's driving mrs nacho crazy, but I think it's kind of funny.
No idea how he came up with it. He's only 3 so he doesn't even know what a contraction is, but he willn't stop using it.
We're going through a series of adorable past tense isms with our 3yo. "Mummy, she tookened it away!" "She has gonned to bed." I love watching him learn rules and misapply them. He's so right...except for the bit where he's wrong. But the PROCESS is there, not just rote learning.
My baby brother used to say "he got gotted" whenever the dog would try to escape me putting him in his crate and I would catch him. To this day, whenever I have to grab one of my pets to cut their nails to something, I say "you got gotted".
Post by: frugalnacho on July 08, 2021, 10:00:31 PM
Post by: Dancin'Dog on July 09, 2021, 07:57:33 AM
DW & I used to blow glass. When asked "What do your parents do?" our 3-4 y/o DD would reply "They "Ho Ass". That answer always required clarification. LOL
Edit: And of course she'd tell them that we were "really good" at it. :)
Post by: GuitarStv on July 09, 2021, 08:41:09 AM
Speaking of toddlers talk...
DW & I used to blow glass. When asked "What do your parents do?" our 3-4 y/o DD would reply "They "Ho Ass". That answer always required clarification. LOL
Edit: And of course she'd tell them that we were "really good" at it. :)
No explanation necessary. Just reply "Damn right we do honey", while making level and solid eye contact with the person you're discussing the topic with.
Post by: shelivesthedream on July 10, 2021, 02:06:43 PM
Post by: BlueHouse on July 11, 2021, 08:22:26 AM
"Adopt" a dog or cat, when they mean "purchase at full price from a commercial breeder". No, you bought a dog/cat.Or, "[he/she] adopted me."
One of the other tenants in my building gets pet food/meds delivered. The box says something along the lines of, "medication for pet parents." Implication is that you do not own your dog anymore, rather it is like a child.
I know...many pet people go way overboard. But...
Well, I have a dog and I really don't like when pet parents call their dogs their "fur babies" , but I like my dog a lot more than I ever thought I would and once the caring part of me started to develop, I really don't like to talk about my relationship as an "owner" of another living thing. So I usually call myself his caretaker, or he's 'my pup", etc. I even feel badly when I look at his collar and wonder how I would like to have to wear that and be on a leash (I know...safety).
I'd just say, get yourself a pet and I bet you'll start to feel differently.
Post by: windytrail on July 14, 2021, 07:24:42 PM
I know...many pet people go way overboard. But...That's fine, understood that many people develop friendships with their pets. It may sound callous but I only enjoy caring for other non-human living things that are of functional use, i.e. sourdough starter, garden veggies, fruit trees, compost piles. We joke about our worms (vermicomposting) being pets sometimes, but the truth is if they died I'd feel bad for a few days then go buy new ones, no problem.
Well, I have a dog and I really don't like when pet parents call their dogs their "fur babies" , but I like my dog a lot more than I ever thought I would and once the caring part of me started to develop, I really don't like to talk about my relationship as an "owner" of another living thing. So I usually call myself his caretaker, or he's 'my pup", etc. I even feel badly when I look at his collar and wonder how I would like to have to wear that and be on a leash (I know...safety).
I'd just say, get yourself a pet and I bet you'll start to feel differently.
Post by: nereo on July 25, 2021, 04:41:50 AM
…and then there is French.My 3 year old son has created a new contraction and shortened "will not" to "willn't". We keep correcting him and telling him it's "will not" or "won't" and willn't isn't a word, but he uses it incessantly. It's driving mrs nacho crazy, but I think it's kind of funny.
No idea how he came up with it. He's only 3 so he doesn't even know what a contraction is, but he willn't stop using it.
We're going through a series of adorable past tense isms with our 3yo. "Mummy, she tookened it away!" "She has gonned to bed." I love watching him learn rules and misapply them. He's so right...except for the bit where he's wrong. But the PROCESS is there, not just rote learning.
Sometimes it feels like English is 50% rule based and 50% memorization of when to break the rules.
Post by: nereo on July 25, 2021, 04:48:49 AM
Saying the former means people are still dying, but generally that’s not the case. They are already dead, we just haven’t recovered their bodies to be certain. Reserve phrases like “the death toll continues to rise” when talking about situations where people are still being killed (e.g. pandemic, war) but not when the event has happened and danger has passes (e.g. the building collapse in Florida).
Post by: nessness on July 25, 2021, 06:47:39 AM
This is a weirdly popular phrase among managers at my work. My manager in particular says it constantly.
Post by: Metalcat on July 25, 2021, 06:53:19 AM
"It doesn't pass the red-face test."
This is a weirdly popular phrase among managers at my work. My manager in particular says it constantly.
what does that mean??
Post by: nereo on July 25, 2021, 11:09:43 AM
Yea, I’d like to know too…"It doesn't pass the red-face test."
This is a weirdly popular phrase among managers at my work. My manager in particular says it constantly.
what does that mean??
Post by: Metalcat on July 25, 2021, 11:18:11 AM
Yea, I’d like to know too…"It doesn't pass the red-face test."
This is a weirdly popular phrase among managers at my work. My manager in particular says it constantly.
what does that mean??
Google indicates that it seems to mean that it's a situation where no one would be embarrassed. I'm finding it hard to imagine how a manager would utilize that as a frequent metric though, unless they're a d-bag who constantly refers to their staff performance as embarrassing??
Post by: Dollar Slice on July 25, 2021, 11:25:14 AM
Google indicates that it seems to mean that it's a situation where no one would be embarrassed. I'm finding it hard to imagine how a manager would utilize that as a frequent metric though, unless they're a d-bag who constantly refers to their staff performance as embarrassing??
From my previous experience with sales/marketing types, I'm thinking they're trying to find the line where their lies, exaggeration and hyperbole are just on this side of outright shameful. Could you utter this sentence to a client without being embarrassed for yourself and your company? It passes the red face test!
Post by: nessness on July 25, 2021, 02:22:49 PM
Yes, the idea is that it would be embarrassing. It mostly comes up in reference to things other parties are trying to get us to agree to that we don't think are technically sound - "Why would we agree to that? It doesn't even pass the red-face test!"Yea, I’d like to know too…"It doesn't pass the red-face test."
This is a weirdly popular phrase among managers at my work. My manager in particular says it constantly.
what does that mean??
Google indicates that it seems to mean that it's a situation where no one would be embarrassed. I'm finding it hard to imagine how a manager would utilize that as a frequent metric though, unless they're a d-bag who constantly refers to their staff performance as embarrassing??
I don't want to get into specifics, but this is a common situation in my job. But there are plenty of other ways you could describe it.
Post by: slackmax on August 10, 2021, 07:39:06 AM
Post by: Morning Glory on August 10, 2021, 08:55:40 AM
The term 'comfort food' is annoying to me. Conjures up an image of a weak and needy and entitled person. Just sayin, lol.
I have GERD so most of those kinds of food actually cause me to experience discomfort.
Post by: slackmax on August 11, 2021, 08:19:22 AM
The term 'comfort food' is annoying to me. Conjures up an image of a weak and needy and entitled person. Just sayin, lol.
I have GERD so most of those kinds of food actually cause me to experience discomfort.
LOL!
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 17, 2021, 08:38:45 AM
Someone needs to learn to proof-read.
Post by: Cool Friend on August 17, 2021, 09:02:55 AM
Post by: Metalcat on August 17, 2021, 09:30:21 AM
I think we need to cut the bullshit and start spelling it "Wendesday."
You pronounce it wen-des-day?
Post by: sui generis on August 17, 2021, 10:20:53 AM
I think we need to cut the bullshit and start spelling it "Wendesday."
Yeah, I was very onboard with the your whole sentiment, until you got to how you'd spell it. The right answer is, of course, "Wensday"!
Post by: Cool Friend on August 17, 2021, 10:25:22 AM
Post by: Metalcat on August 17, 2021, 10:26:11 AM
I think we need to cut the bullshit and start spelling it "Wendesday."
Yeah, I was very onboard with the your whole sentiment, until you got to how you'd spell it. The right answer is, of course, "Wensday"!
Or we could just get it right and spell it Odinsday
Post by: Morning Glory on August 17, 2021, 11:01:38 AM
I think we need to cut the bullshit and start spelling it "Wendesday."
Yeah, I was very onboard with the your whole sentiment, until you got to how you'd spell it. The right answer is, of course, "Wensday"!
Or we could just get it right and spell it Odinsday
Odinsdag
Post by: Metalcat on August 17, 2021, 11:13:43 AM
I think we need to cut the bullshit and start spelling it "Wendesday."
Yeah, I was very onboard with the your whole sentiment, until you got to how you'd spell it. The right answer is, of course, "Wensday"!
Or we could just get it right and spell it Odinsday
Odinsdag
Well if we're going to get into the weeds in terms of old English, then that's a whole other kettle of fish, and the very reason behind the wonky spelling in the first place. I proposed how Odin's Day would be spelled in current Standard English.
Post by: Samuel on August 17, 2021, 11:58:17 AM
Post by: GuitarStv on August 17, 2021, 12:14:38 PM
Call it whatever you want as long as we can stop calling it humpday...
How will people know which day to procreate on then?????
Post by: Metalcat on August 17, 2021, 12:37:51 PM
Call it whatever you want as long as we can stop calling it humpday...
Yeah, that's awful.
Post by: Bateaux on August 17, 2021, 08:50:47 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 18, 2021, 09:23:10 AM
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
Post by: solon on August 18, 2021, 09:48:54 AM
Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
My bladder is Norwegian.
Post by: chaskavitch on August 18, 2021, 09:54:06 AM
Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
Oui oui?
Post by: Paul der Krake on August 18, 2021, 10:08:11 AM
In French you must put spaces before colons, semi-colons, and question and exclamation marks. But not regular periods.Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
Oui oui?
Oui oui ?
Oui oui.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51uqhtJHmSL._SX441_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
I award you no cultural appropriation points.
Post by: chaskavitch on August 18, 2021, 11:36:30 AM
In French you must put spaces before colons, semi-colons, and question and exclamation marks. But not regular periods.Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
Oui oui?
Oui oui ?
Oui oui.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51uqhtJHmSL._SX441_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
I award you no cultural appropriation points.
Haha. Fair enough, I know about 5 words in French, and it's VERY different from German, which is the only other language I am semi-proficient in.
Do I get mildly amusing points, at least?
Post by: Metalcat on August 18, 2021, 11:41:22 AM
In French you must put spaces before colons, semi-colons, and question and exclamation marks. But not regular periods.Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
Oui oui?
Oui oui ?
Oui oui.
I award you no cultural appropriation points.
I swear I have French PTSD, symptoms of being an Anglo from Quebec
Post by: Morning Glory on August 18, 2021, 11:54:36 AM
Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
I wish I had a Gaul bladder instead of a gallbladder; it would make eating French fries a much more comfortable experience.
It might mean that I may or may not be allowed to play sports, depending on whether I have a cis- or transalpine Gaul bladder
Post by: Morning Glory on August 18, 2021, 11:55:32 AM
In French you must put spaces before colons, semi-colons, and question and exclamation marks. But not regular periods.Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
Oui oui?
Oui oui ?
Oui oui.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51uqhtJHmSL._SX441_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
I award you no cultural appropriation points.
Haha. Fair enough, I know about 5 words in French, and it's VERY different from German, which is the only other language I am semi-proficient in.
Do I get mildly amusing points, at least?
You get points for being able to post a picture on the forum. I still haven't figured that out.
Post by: dougules on August 18, 2021, 11:57:03 AM
In French you must put spaces before colons, semi-colons, and question and exclamation marks. But not regular periods.Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
Oui oui?
Oui oui ?
Oui oui.
I award you no cultural appropriation points.
I swear I have French PTSD, symptoms of being an Anglo from Quebec
Do you not legally have to call it TSPT?
Post by: Metalcat on August 18, 2021, 12:08:00 PM
In French you must put spaces before colons, semi-colons, and question and exclamation marks. But not regular periods.Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
Oui oui?
Oui oui ?
Oui oui.
I award you no cultural appropriation points.
I swear I have French PTSD, symptoms of being an Anglo from Quebec
Do you not legally have to call it TSPT?
I don't live there anymore. Instead I live in the most French area of Ontario, go figure.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on August 18, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(Should that not be homophones? (homonym = same spelling, multiple meanings; homophone = sound the same, spelled different)
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
Post by: AccidentalMiser on August 18, 2021, 01:13:47 PM
I work in the nuclear industry and we have an outsized "inside baseball" vocabulary and acronym list as I know many industries do. One guy I work with cannot utter a single sentence without tossing in at least one "nuclearism".
Drives me nuts. He's a great guy but it's gotten to "nails on the chalkboard" level.
/rant
Post by: RWD on August 18, 2021, 03:01:19 PM
You get points for being able to post a picture on the forum. I still haven't figured that out.
Enclose the URL of the image in "img" tags, like such:
Code: [Select]
[img]https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51uqhtJHmSL._SX441_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg[/img]If the photo you want to post is on your local computer you should either use the attachment feature or upload it somewhere internet-accessible first.
Post by: Morning Glory on August 18, 2021, 03:17:08 PM
You get points for being able to post a picture on the forum. I still haven't figured that out.
Enclose the URL of the image in "img" tags, like such:Code: [Select][img]https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51uqhtJHmSL._SX441_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg[/img]
If the photo you want to post is on your local computer you should either use the attachment feature or upload it somewhere internet-accessible first.
Thanks, I will try this method. I have tried the attachment feature on my phone and it always times out because the file is too large.
It worked!!! I took the picture out again because it was huge and not very funny.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 18, 2021, 05:20:11 PM
Homonyms seem to really get people - most likely because spell check is fine if the wrong word is still a word. And since we have spell check we seem to no longer do our own proof reading. :-(Should that not be homophones? (homonym = same spelling, multiple meanings; homophone = sound the same, spelled different)
So after the peak that should be peek the other day, I just saw gaul when they meant gall. Does this mean we now have gaul bladders?
You are right. OMG, you will all drum me off this thread for that!
Post by: GreenSheep on August 19, 2021, 05:27:07 AM
NO. "Overtop" is a VERB, and sometimes a very specific noun:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/overtop
verb (used with object), o·ver·topped, o·ver·top·ping.
to rise over or above the top of: a skyscraper that overtops all the other buildings.
to rise above in authority; take precedence over; override: No individual shall overtop the law.
to surpass or excel: a rise in sales that overtopped everyone in the industry.
noun
a top, sometimes sleeveless, designed to be worn over another garment, as a shirt or dress.
Post by: calimom on August 19, 2021, 12:29:41 PM
"Please advise" set me off in a company Email yesterday.
If it's any comfort, at least they didn't ask for advise.
Post by: BlueHouse on August 20, 2021, 08:01:51 PM
I live in Washington, DC, and I think about 15 years ago, some people started referring to the DC-Maryland-Virginia metro area as "the DMV". Aside from constantly thinking they mean the department of motor vehicles, when you're in this metro area, we're much more interested in knowing a more detailed location. Imagine meeting someone in Manhattan and asking "where do you live?" and their reply is "the New York metropolitan area". No, you really want to know if they're from the city, NJ, or CT, or brooklyn, queens, etc.
It really annoys me, because I think they are embarrassed about where they live (as in they live in a well-off suburb and want to be seen as gritty)
Post by: nereo on August 21, 2021, 01:38:59 PM
This is a BOYS bike (or: This is a GIRLS bike) when talking about 16” bicycles meant for 3-8 year olds.
There’s literally nothing gender specific about these bikes - what’s meant is that the GIRLS bike is purple/pink and sometimes has Elsa on itwhile the BOYS bike is some primary color and might have stickers of construction vehicles. Yet when looking for a used bike for my 3 year old the sellers are often *SO SPECIFIC* about which gender this bike is for. I even responded to one advertising a good BOYS bike only to get a curt response that I should “read the ad - this is a BOYS bike”.
FWIW a close friend of ours has a young boy who picked out his own bike for his birthday - and he selected a WonderWoman themed bike: “she’s awesome, cause she can fly!”
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 21, 2021, 03:52:06 PM
One I’ve recently encountered:
This is a BOYS bike (or: This is a GIRLS bike) when talking about 16” bicycles meant for 3-8 year olds.
There’s literally nothing gender specific about these bikes - what’s meant is that the GIRLS bike is purple/pink and sometimes has Elsa on itwhile the BOYS bike is some primary color and might have stickers of construction vehicles. Yet when looking for a used bike for my 3 year old the sellers are often *SO SPECIFIC* about which gender this bike is for. I even responded to one advertising a good BOYS bike only to get a curt response that I should “read the ad - this is a BOYS bike”.
FWIW a close friend of ours has a young boy who picked out his own bike for his birthday - and he selected a WonderWoman themed bike: “she’s awesome, cause she can fly!”
Wow the gender brainwashing starts early.
Of course there are so many colour choices now - when I was a kid bikes basically came in red, blue and green. Later white showed up. We decorated them ourselves. Yes I feel like a Dimetrodon. ;-)
Post by: Morning Glory on August 21, 2021, 04:25:23 PM
One I’ve recently encountered:
This is a BOYS bike (or: This is a GIRLS bike) when talking about 16” bicycles meant for 3-8 year olds.
There’s literally nothing gender specific about these bikes - what’s meant is that the GIRLS bike is purple/pink and sometimes has Elsa on itwhile the BOYS bike is some primary color and might have stickers of construction vehicles. Yet when looking for a used bike for my 3 year old the sellers are often *SO SPECIFIC* about which gender this bike is for. I even responded to one advertising a good BOYS bike only to get a curt response that I should “read the ad - this is a BOYS bike”.
FWIW a close friend of ours has a young boy who picked out his own bike for his birthday - and he selected a WonderWoman themed bike: “she’s awesome, cause she can fly!”
Wow the gender brainwashing starts early.
Of course there are so many colour choices now - when I was a kid bikes basically came in red, blue and green. Later white showed up. We decorated them ourselves. Yes I feel like a Dimetrodon. ;-)
Mine had a banana seat and tassels on the handlebars. I used to stand up on the seat while the bike was coasting. That would have been harder with a boys bike.
I'm disappointed with my current women's bike. It has the lower frame to make it easier to ride in a skirt, but nothing to prevent the skirt from getting tangled in the back wheel or the chain.. I usually ride in shorts and change when I get to work, or if it's colder out I just wear pants that day. Totally defeats the purpose of having a different frame for women.
Post by: shelivesthedream on August 22, 2021, 02:05:08 AM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 22, 2021, 05:51:22 AM
One I’ve recently encountered:
This is a BOYS bike (or: This is a GIRLS bike) when talking about 16” bicycles meant for 3-8 year olds.
There’s literally nothing gender specific about these bikes - what’s meant is that the GIRLS bike is purple/pink and sometimes has Elsa on itwhile the BOYS bike is some primary color and might have stickers of construction vehicles. Yet when looking for a used bike for my 3 year old the sellers are often *SO SPECIFIC* about which gender this bike is for. I even responded to one advertising a good BOYS bike only to get a curt response that I should “read the ad - this is a BOYS bike”.
FWIW a close friend of ours has a young boy who picked out his own bike for his birthday - and he selected a WonderWoman themed bike: “she’s awesome, cause she can fly!”
Wow the gender brainwashing starts early.
Of course there are so many colour choices now - when I was a kid bikes basically came in red, blue and green. Later white showed up. We decorated them ourselves. Yes I feel like a Dimetrodon. ;-)
Mine had a banana seat and tassels on the handlebars. I used to stand up on the seat while the bike was coasting. That would have been harder with a boys bike.
I'm disappointed with my current women's bike. It has the lower frame to make it easier to ride in a skirt, but nothing to prevent the skirt from getting tangled in the back wheel or the chain.. I usually ride in shorts and change when I get to work, or if it's colder out I just wear pants that day. Totally defeats the purpose of having a different frame for women.
The lower frame is great for those of us with stiff knees. On YouTube (I think "not just bikes") I saw bikes with covered gear assemblies, perfect for skirts. Plus the really deep drop of Dutch bikes is nicer than the drop on my bike.
Post by: shelivesthedream on August 22, 2021, 06:11:05 AM
E.g. I find it really annoying
I find it really
The whole idea is that you're writing and write something "wrong" first and THEN cross it out and write the correct word(s).
Post by: teen persuasion on August 23, 2021, 08:57:37 PM
I copy the best-sellers list from the Sunday paper, highlight the titles our library owns, and put it under the glass on the circ desk for patrons to reference. This week's list of non-fiction nearly all appeared to be quite fictional in nature (especially those authored by Fox news staffers, yes, plural!).
Post by: Dicey on August 23, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
I think the designation non-fiction has become oxymoronic. Perhaps it should be retired.Perhaps you could categorize it as Fantasy...
I copy the best-sellers list from the Sunday paper, highlight the titles our library owns, and put it under the glass on the circ desk for patrons to reference. This week's list of non-fiction nearly all appeared to be quite fictional in nature (especially those authored by Fox news staffers, yes, plural!).
Post by: nereo on August 24, 2021, 04:29:20 AM
I think the designation non-fiction has become oxymoronic. Perhaps it should be retired.Perhaps you could categorize it as Fantasy...
I copy the best-sellers list from the Sunday paper, highlight the titles our library owns, and put it under the glass on the circ desk for patrons to reference. This week's list of non-fiction nearly all appeared to be quite fictional in nature (especially those authored by Fox news staffers, yes, plural!).
Now that there’s a Dem in the WH, those titles are all dystopian in nature.
Post by: Chaplin on August 24, 2021, 11:05:42 AM
I think the designation non-fiction has become oxymoronic. Perhaps it should be retired.Perhaps you could categorize it as Fantasy...
I copy the best-sellers list from the Sunday paper, highlight the titles our library owns, and put it under the glass on the circ desk for patrons to reference. This week's list of non-fiction nearly all appeared to be quite fictional in nature (especially those authored by Fox news staffers, yes, plural!).
Now that there’s a Dem in the WH, those titles are all dystopian in nature.
Dystopian fiction is my favorite kind! Dystopian reality is my least favorite.
These observations about fiction and non-fiction are a bit like death of satire and irony: The Onion and similar outlets are less funny now that they hit way too close to home and it's hard to tell if they aren't actually reporting that actually happened.
Post by: sui generis on August 24, 2021, 03:45:00 PM
Post by: nereo on August 24, 2021, 03:55:56 PM
I'm really tired of "Be well" as a sign off to emails, etc. It's only the build up of it over time (it's really getting overused in my circles) that is making me start to react like, "Don't tell me how to be! I'll be well if I want to!" I dunno. In theory it shouldn't be any different than "stay safe" or any other sort of well wishes that are, technically, phrased in the imperative/as a command. But it is just rubbing me the wrong way.
It makes me think of “be well, do good work, and keep in touch”
Indeed that phrase doesn’t evoke the fond memories that our once did, either
Post by: GreenSheep on August 24, 2021, 04:22:35 PM
I'm really tired of "Be well" as a sign off to emails, etc. It's only the build up of it over time (it's really getting overused in my circles) that is making me start to react like, "Don't tell me how to be! I'll be well if I want to!" I dunno. In theory it shouldn't be any different than "stay safe" or any other sort of well wishes that are, technically, phrased in the imperative/as a command. But it is just rubbing me the wrong way.
It makes me think of “be well, do good work, and keep in touch”
Indeed that phrase doesn’t evoke the fond memories that our once did, either
I'm starting to feel the same way about "Take care." It seems like people are looking for a way to ease out of a conversation instead of just abruptly saying, "Bye." I'm guilty of doing this by telling people to have a good day. I like "Thank you" if it's an interaction with a cashier or something, but there are times when there's just nothing really appropriate to say, but the conversation is obviously over, so you fill that dead air with... something. Is this an American thing, like grinning at anyone and everyone? (Another thing I'm guilty of. If trying to look friendly is a crime.)
Post by: Metalcat on August 24, 2021, 04:58:38 PM
I'm really tired of "Be well" as a sign off to emails, etc. It's only the build up of it over time (it's really getting overused in my circles) that is making me start to react like, "Don't tell me how to be! I'll be well if I want to!" I dunno. In theory it shouldn't be any different than "stay safe" or any other sort of well wishes that are, technically, phrased in the imperative/as a command. But it is just rubbing me the wrong way.
Ew, yeah, I don't like that either.
No real idea why, but I just don't like it.
That said, I don't like any sign offs and started omitting them completely years ago because I couldn't find one I could stand, so just started boycotting them.
Post by: marble_faun on August 24, 2021, 07:12:19 PM
I think the designation non-fiction has become oxymoronic. Perhaps it should be retired.
I copy the best-sellers list from the Sunday paper, highlight the titles our library owns, and put it under the glass on the circ desk for patrons to reference. This week's list of non-fiction nearly all appeared to be quite fictional in nature (especially those authored by Fox news staffers, yes, plural!).
It seems like you're in a position to champion better-quality books! Is it necessary to rely on the best-seller list for what the library highlights for patrons? Often the bestsellers aren't really all that great.
Post by: Metalcat on August 24, 2021, 07:23:32 PM
I think the designation non-fiction has become oxymoronic. Perhaps it should be retired.
I copy the best-sellers list from the Sunday paper, highlight the titles our library owns, and put it under the glass on the circ desk for patrons to reference. This week's list of non-fiction nearly all appeared to be quite fictional in nature (especially those authored by Fox news staffers, yes, plural!).
It seems like you're in a position to champion better-quality books! Is it necessary to rely on the best-seller list for what the library highlights for patrons? Often the bestsellers aren't really all that great.
Barf. Yes.
I've learned to regard best seller lists as a warning sign NOT to read a book.
I only read textbooks for 15 years, so when I started reading book-books again a few years ago I was like "ooh, bestseller, that should be good" and then BAM, 80% of what I was reading was pure, unreadable shit.
I almost gave up on books again until I started actively avoiding bestsellers and then suddenly books got sooooo much better.
Post by: Morning Glory on August 24, 2021, 08:11:52 PM
I think the designation non-fiction has become oxymoronic. Perhaps it should be retired.
I copy the best-sellers list from the Sunday paper, highlight the titles our library owns, and put it under the glass on the circ desk for patrons to reference. This week's list of non-fiction nearly all appeared to be quite fictional in nature (especially those authored by Fox news staffers, yes, plural!).
It seems like you're in a position to champion better-quality books! Is it necessary to rely on the best-seller list for what the library highlights for patrons? Often the bestsellers aren't really all that great.
Barf. Yes.
I've learned to regard best seller lists as a warning sign NOT to read a book.
I only read textbooks for 15 years, so when I started reading book-books again a few years ago I was like "ooh, bestseller, that should be good" and then BAM, 80% of what I was reading was pure, unreadable shit.
I almost gave up on books again until I started actively avoiding bestsellers and then suddenly books got sooooo much better.
Id like to pile in here and add Oprah's list as a no-go too. A few years ago I relied on her seal of recommendation. Some books were good, some were meh. Then there's the ones that are disturbing af and should have warning labels. Never trusted Oprah again after I read "The Road" by Cormac McCarthy while suffering from ppd.
Note: I'm totally ok with literature having topics that might disturb some people, but that was fucking gratuitous. The writing was good, and I finished it, but I probably shouldn't have. Not saying we should censor things, just maybe put a little note in the description on the back, to not read if you are clinically depressed and triggered by certain things.
Post by: Dollar Slice on August 24, 2021, 08:36:16 PM
Note: I'm totally ok with literature having topics that might disturb some people, but that was fucking gratuitous. The writing was good, and I finished it, but I probably shouldn't have. Not saying we should censor things, just maybe put a little note in the description on the back, to not read if you are clinically depressed and triggered by certain things.
Yeah, some books can really mess with you if you're not in a good place. I had some kind of medical episode that affected the way my brain was working (short term memory loss etc.) while binging Philip K. Dick and wow, that was not OK. Stopped reading mid book and never read another word of his work again.
I like going to some of the indie bookstores here in NYC and see what their best-selling books are. They tend to be more interesting (although still hit-or-miss for me since of course I have specific tastes that won't be the same as everyone else). This is my favorite one, they have some of their lists (best sellers, staff recommendations, etc.) online under the "Browse Books" menu: https://www.mcnallyjackson.com/ I usually do this for gift ideas for family if I'm stuck for an idea...
I'm really tired of "Be well" as a sign off to emails, etc. It's only the build up of it over time (it's really getting overused in my circles) that is making me start to react like, "Don't tell me how to be! I'll be well if I want to!" I dunno. In theory it shouldn't be any different than "stay safe" or any other sort of well wishes that are, technically, phrased in the imperative/as a command. But it is just rubbing me the wrong way.
I think the words "well" and "wellness" are starting to make me itch because of the whole "wellness industry" thing. There's a lot of woo and toxicity associated there.
I've been talking on the phone a lot with a couple of friends (a married couple) this past week trying to organize something - I'm not usually a phone person but they are elderly and prefer that. They leave me the most over-the-top messages, like "OK, thanks for your help, you're an angel, hope you're well and hanging in there, take care, we love you! Bye! We love you!" I think they are the sweetest but I bet they would get on some people's last nerve in terms of sign-offs.
Post by: teen persuasion on August 24, 2021, 08:39:12 PM
The director selects interesting books, and books we know will appeal to our patrons (or be expected by them - *ahem* anything by Patterson). But often the interesting books are sadly neglected in favor of those fiction bestsellers.I think the designation non-fiction has become oxymoronic. Perhaps it should be retired.
I copy the best-sellers list from the Sunday paper, highlight the titles our library owns, and put it under the glass on the circ desk for patrons to reference. This week's list of non-fiction nearly all appeared to be quite fictional in nature (especially those authored by Fox news staffers, yes, plural!).
It seems like you're in a position to champion better-quality books! Is it necessary to rely on the best-seller list for what the library highlights for patrons? Often the bestsellers aren't really all that great.
The newspaper bestseller list is just a lazy shortcut a former coworker started - people read the paper, spot something they'd like to request, but can't quite recall the details in person. Having the list right there jogs their memory. We also have BookPage available, and patrons love to take it home to discover new things to request. It just drives us a bit crazy when BP promotes books that aren't yet released, so we don't have it, and can't place a hold on a non-existent bib record.
The non fiction list I referred to struck me initially precisely because we had NONE of the items. When I looked closer, it was obvious why.
I do promote all our new acquisitions on social media - blog posts listing every new title, sliders showing covers, daily Facebook posts with a short list - and all are hyperlinked to the appropriate catalog entry for easy holds. But some patrons are still old school...
Post by: sui generis on August 24, 2021, 09:50:45 PM
I'm really tired of "Be well" as a sign off to emails, etc. It's only the build up of it over time (it's really getting overused in my circles) that is making me start to react like, "Don't tell me how to be! I'll be well if I want to!" I dunno. In theory it shouldn't be any different than "stay safe" or any other sort of well wishes that are, technically, phrased in the imperative/as a command. But it is just rubbing me the wrong way.
I think the words "well" and "wellness" are starting to make me itch because of the whole "wellness industry" thing. There's a lot of woo and toxicity associated there.
I've been talking on the phone a lot with a couple of friends (a married couple) this past week trying to organize something - I'm not usually a phone person but they are elderly and prefer that. They leave me the most over-the-top messages, like "OK, thanks for your help, you're an angel, hope you're well and hanging in there, take care, we love you! Bye! We love you!" I think they are the sweetest but I bet they would get on some people's last nerve in terms of sign-offs.
Yes! I was thinking the "be" somehow is more abrasive to me than other similar commands (like take in "take care" or stay in "stay safe") and I think it might be but you made me realize that the "well" part rubs me the wrong way also. I actually am really grossed out by that word just contemplating this post. The two together are the worst.
Post by: BlueHouse on August 29, 2021, 02:56:04 PM
I'm really tired of "Be well" as a sign off to emails, etc. It's only the build up of it over time (it's really getting overused in my circles) that is making me start to react like, "Don't tell me how to be! I'll be well if I want to!" I dunno. In theory it shouldn't be any different than "stay safe" or any other sort of well wishes that are, technically, phrased in the imperative/as a command. But it is just rubbing me the wrong way.
I think the words "well" and "wellness" are starting to make me itch because of the whole "wellness industry" thing. There's a lot of woo and toxicity associated there.
I've been talking on the phone a lot with a couple of friends (a married couple) this past week trying to organize something - I'm not usually a phone person but they are elderly and prefer that. They leave me the most over-the-top messages, like "OK, thanks for your help, you're an angel, hope you're well and hanging in there, take care, we love you! Bye! We love you!" I think they are the sweetest but I bet they would get on some people's last nerve in terms of sign-offs.
Yes! I was thinking the "be" somehow is more abrasive to me than other similar commands (like take in "take care" or stay in "stay safe") and I think it might be but you made me realize that the "well" part rubs me the wrong way also. I actually am really grossed out by that word just contemplating this post. The two together are the worst.
Yikes. Since covid, I've really wanted to add something a bit more thoughtful than "thanks!" at the end of my email messages, so I guess I'm guilty. I've been adding things like "stay healthy" or "stay safe" or "be well" because honestly, it's the only human interaction I had for so long and I'm not good at it.
Thank goodness I FIREd and don't have to email stuff anymore.
Post by: nereo on August 29, 2021, 04:06:38 PM
I guess I appreciate the “be well” because at least that is a tacit acknowledgement that due many things are far from “ok” (at least per 2019 standards).
Post by: Paul der Krake on August 29, 2021, 04:12:58 PM
Quote
Hi Paul,
Thank you for the update. I think we should move forward with proposal #2.
Let me know if I can assist further.
Thanks,
Tom
Generally Generic Employee
o: +202-867-5309
e: tom.smith@generalcorp.com
12 lines of decor for just one sentence of non-committal content.
I only say hello/thanks at the beginning of a thread or when it has reached its logical conclusion.
Also, proper IM etiquette should be mandatory training in every corporation.
https://www.nohello.com/
https://dontasktoask.com/
Post by: Dollar Slice on August 29, 2021, 08:00:19 PM
Yikes. Since covid, I've really wanted to add something a bit more thoughtful than "thanks!" at the end of my email messages, so I guess I'm guilty. I've been adding things like "stay healthy" or "stay safe" or "be well" because honestly, it's the only human interaction I had for so long and I'm not good at it.
It's one of those context things. There's a difference between telling a friend or family member to stay safe and having a customer service representative from MasterCard say it :-) I don't mind hearing it from someone who actually cares about me.
For over a year now I’ve been uncertain how I should answer the standard question “how are you doing”. Because while I and my immediate family have managed to stay physically healthy, that’s about the only thing that is “ok” or “normal” about our lives.
I like to be honest when people ask how I am (hey, if you don't want to know, don't ask!) so during COVID I'll say things like "surviving" or "still alive". It just feels like lying to say 'fine.' I've had a really rough year with serious health problems and multiple deaths in my friends and family circle. I'm not 'fine.'
Post by: Metalcat on September 04, 2021, 09:22:34 AM
When did people start replacing "addictive" with "addicting" and why?
I understand that it's not technically wrong, but I'm more curious about why the totally unnecessary substitution has started happening, when I never heard this before and I've studied addiction for many years. I NEVER heard "addicting" in the early 2000s, except in the context where it's the only option, like "he's addicting himself to video games by playing them every day".
Post by: nereo on September 04, 2021, 10:54:30 AM
It’s the sort of word where I envision Mandy Patinkin saying, ‘You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.’
Lately it’s being [over]used to suggest compromise between the two parties. But if ‘partisan’ means: prejudiced in favor of a particular party - then by extension ‘bipartisan’ should mean: prejudiced in favor of both parties. Only you can’t really favor both parties in a de facto two-party system.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on September 05, 2021, 05:41:39 AM
“Bipartisan”If it's prejudiced in favor of both (political) parties, then it would seem logical that there's a third party (the people? :P) against which a bill is prejudiced, right?
It’s the sort of word where I envision Mandy Patinkin saying, ‘You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.’
Lately it’s being [over]used to suggest compromise between the two parties. But if ‘partisan’ means: prejudiced in favor of a particular party - then by extension ‘bipartisan’ should mean: prejudiced in favor of both parties. Only you can’t really favor both parties in a de facto two-party system.
Also, when a bill gets a token couple of votes from the opposing political party, while the overwhelming majority of the opposing party still opposes it, I have a hard time accepting that as "bipartisan."
Post by: slackmax on September 09, 2021, 06:19:08 AM
Suddenly everyone from White House staffers to contestants on Jerry Springer Show are using the word 'cognizant'.
They could easily say 'I wasn't aware of that fact' but they can't resist saying ' I wasn't cognizant of that fact', since they are so smart.
Post by: Dollar Slice on September 09, 2021, 07:28:18 AM
Suddenly everyone from White House staffers to contestants on Jerry Springer Show are using the word 'cognizant'.
They could easily say 'I wasn't aware of that fact' but they can't resist saying ' I wasn't cognizant of that fact', since they are so smart.
Hmm, do you think they're really using it more often, or maybe you're suddenly more cognizant of other people's word usage for some reason? Maybe it's all in your head...
Post by: Taran Wanderer on September 09, 2021, 09:39:43 PM
Suddenly everyone from White House staffers to contestants on Jerry Springer Show are using the word 'cognizant'.
They could easily say 'I wasn't aware of that fact' but they can't resist saying ' I wasn't cognizant of that fact', since they are so smart.
Hmm, do you think they're really using it more often, or maybe you're suddenly more cognizant of other people's word usage for some reason? Maybe it's all in your head...
I don't think slackmax is imagining it. I'm cognizant of bipartisan use of the word also. It appears to be addicting. Be well!
Post by: slackmax on September 10, 2021, 08:17:37 AM
Suddenly everyone from White House staffers to contestants on Jerry Springer Show are using the word 'cognizant'.
They could easily say 'I wasn't aware of that fact' but they can't resist saying ' I wasn't cognizant of that fact', since they are so smart.
Hmm, do you think they're really using it more often, or maybe you're suddenly more cognizant of other people's word usage for some reason? Maybe it's all in your head...
I guess I'll have to cogitate about that. :)
Post by: Dancin'Dog on September 10, 2021, 09:40:36 AM
I hate the phrase "You get what you pay for." It always sounds like a snobby way to say you shouldn't shop around for better prices, or try to solve a need with a less expensive solution. I admit that economizing doesn't always work, but I find great satisfaction in finding simple solutions.
Post by: Metalcat on September 10, 2021, 09:44:22 AM
It's probably already been mentioned in this thread, but don't recall seeing it.
I hate the phrase "You get what you pay for." It always sounds like a snobby way to say you shouldn't shop around for better prices, or try to solve a need with a less expensive solution. I admit that economizing doesn't always work, but I find great satisfaction in finding simple solutions.
Funny, I've only ever heard this phrase used by people who *did* cheap out on something and then regretted it. I've never actually heard anyone say it to someone else in terms of telling them they should spend more.
But yeah, that could be a really douchy thing to say to someone.
Post by: Dancin'Dog on September 10, 2021, 11:10:00 AM
It's probably already been mentioned in this thread, but don't recall seeing it.
I hate the phrase "You get what you pay for." It always sounds like a snobby way to say you shouldn't shop around for better prices, or try to solve a need with a less expensive solution. I admit that economizing doesn't always work, but I find great satisfaction in finding simple solutions.
Funny, I've only ever heard this phrase used by people who *did* cheap out on something and then regretted it. I've never actually heard anyone say it to someone else in terms of telling them they should spend more.
But yeah, that could be a really douchy thing to say to someone.
Guys tend to use the phrase a lot when they're trying to justify buying Pro-grade tools. I enjoy using quality tool too, but only buy them if it's something that I know I'll use often and will likely be worked hard. There's no reason to buy the most expensive version, or even brand new, when there are inexpensive options that will serve the same basic purpose.
Guys also say it when they're trying to justify buying expensive new toys. They tend to be the same ones that freak out when their expensive toys are out of warranty, because the parts and service rates are outrageous.
Being frugal, I've heard it when asking other guys about various products. We guys will also say it when things happen to break, but it can be said in a variety of tones; matter of factly, sarcastically, or in general humor. I've said it jokingly when expensive high-end products fail. Like when a German product fails I'll say "Guess you should'a bought the Japanese one...
I think the phase mainly bugs me when there's almost no difference between two products, except one has a name brand label and the other is generic, or produced in the wrong country.
Post by: nereo on September 10, 2021, 11:22:35 AM
It's probably already been mentioned in this thread, but don't recall seeing it.
I hate the phrase "You get what you pay for." It always sounds like a snobby way to say you shouldn't shop around for better prices, or try to solve a need with a less expensive solution. I admit that economizing doesn't always work, but I find great satisfaction in finding simple solutions.
I hear this used ALL THE TIME to justify paying substantially more for something. Frequently in this forum. IME and generalizing broadly, the absolute cheapest option is often not a great value, but the most expensive tier is rarely worth the premium from a cost-benefit standpoint.
Post by: Paul der Krake on September 10, 2021, 11:24:15 AM
Post by: Dicey on September 13, 2021, 07:51:28 AM
I get what I pay for all the time. It helps that I volunteer at a Thrift Shop.It's probably already been mentioned in this thread, but don't recall seeing it.
I hate the phrase "You get what you pay for." It always sounds like a snobby way to say you shouldn't shop around for better prices, or try to solve a need with a less expensive solution. I admit that economizing doesn't always work, but I find great satisfaction in finding simple solutions.
Funny, I've only ever heard this phrase used by people who *did* cheap out on something and then regretted it. I've never actually heard anyone say it to someone else in terms of telling them they should spend more.
But yeah, that could be a really douchy thing to say to someone.
Guys tend to use the phrase a lot when they're trying to justify buying Pro-grade tools. I enjoy using quality tool too, but only buy them if it's something that I know I'll use often and will likely be worked hard. There's no reason to buy the most expensive version, or even brand new, when there are inexpensive options that will serve the same basic purpose.
Guys also say it when they're trying to justify buying expensive new toys. They tend to be the same ones that freak out when their expensive toys are out of warranty, because the parts and service rates are outrageous.
Being frugal, I've heard it when asking other guys about various products. We guys will also say it when things happen to break, but it can be said in a variety of tones; matter of factly, sarcastically, or in general humor. I've said it jokingly when expensive high-end products fail. Like when a German product fails I'll say "Guess you should'a bought the Japanese one...
I think the phase mainly bugs me when there's almost no difference between two products, except one has a name brand label and the other is generic, or produced in the wrong country.
It's probably already been mentioned in this thread, but don't recall seeing it.I'd be inclined to combat this with snarky humor.
I hate the phrase "You get what you pay for." It always sounds like a snobby way to say you shouldn't shop around for better prices, or try to solve a need with a less expensive solution. I admit that economizing doesn't always work, but I find great satisfaction in finding simple solutions.
Them : "You get what you pay for."
You: "Unless you can steal it."
Post by: DadJokes on September 13, 2021, 07:56:55 AM
But yeah, saying it to someone else is definitely douchy.
Post by: nereo on September 14, 2021, 06:51:00 PM
I'll say "you get what you pay for" when I get something for free that doesn't last long or if I really cheaped out on something.
But yeah, saying it to someone else is definitely douchy.
It’s interesting - as we just moved into a new place and were forced to pack and unpack all our stuff I realized just how many things we own that we never paid for at all. I’ve got a solid oak kitchen table and a picnic table I got for free and required only that I pick it up and spend a few hours sanding. Years later they still look great. Did I ‘get what i paid for’? If so, what does that even mean??
Post by: DadJokes on September 15, 2021, 04:47:19 AM
I'll say "you get what you pay for" when I get something for free that doesn't last long or if I really cheaped out on something.
But yeah, saying it to someone else is definitely douchy.
It’s interesting - as we just moved into a new place and were forced to pack and unpack all our stuff I realized just how many things we own that we never paid for at all. I’ve got a solid oak kitchen table and a picnic table I got for free and required only that I pick it up and spend a few hours sanding. Years later they still look great. Did I ‘get what i paid for’? If so, what does that even mean??
No, you got way more than what you paid for. I think of it from an accounting perspective. An item is good for X years. If the original purchase price was $Y, then annual cost can be thought of as being $Y/X. If I buy a table for $100, then I expect it to last 20 years. If I buy a table for $25 at a yard sale, then I only expect it to last 5 years. If it lasts longer, then I got more than what I paid for.
Almost every piece of furniture in our house was free or attained at yard sales. We've certainly gotten far more out of it all than we paid.
Post by: Travis on September 15, 2021, 07:17:46 AM
It's probably already been mentioned in this thread, but don't recall seeing it.
I hate the phrase "You get what you pay for." It always sounds like a snobby way to say you shouldn't shop around for better prices, or try to solve a need with a less expensive solution. I admit that economizing doesn't always work, but I find great satisfaction in finding simple solutions.
I never hear it quite that way, but rather that I shouldn't complain about the quality of something when I know I got it for free or close to it.
Post by: GreenSheep on September 15, 2021, 05:17:21 PM
It's a lazy, overused sentence-starter, as in, "Let's face it, I just couldn't be bothered to think of a more creative way to start this paragraph." In professional writing, it's just so... unprofessional.
Post by: Metalcat on September 16, 2021, 07:37:10 AM
"Let's face it..."
It's a lazy, overused sentence-starter, as in, "Let's face it, I just couldn't be bothered to think of a more creative way to start this paragraph." In professional writing, it's just so... unprofessional.
Ugh, what a horrible phrase to overuse. It implies total defeat. That's like overusing "So we're fucked" as a sentence starter.
Post by: solon on September 16, 2021, 11:52:36 AM
Post by: Metalcat on September 16, 2021, 12:20:26 PM
I've always understood "let's face it" to mean "you need to face this", or "you need to come around to my way of thinking".
Either way, it sets a defeatist tone. Nobody is going to start a sentence with "Let's face it" and produce an encouraging sentiment.
Post by: GuitarStv on September 16, 2021, 01:02:58 PM
(https://geekwisdom.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/mary-jane-watson.jpg)
Post by: zolotiyeruki on September 17, 2021, 09:05:50 AM
I suspect that's because people have a harder time accepting an unexpected negative than an unexpected positive.I've always understood "let's face it" to mean "you need to face this", or "you need to come around to my way of thinking".
Either way, it sets a defeatist tone. Nobody is going to start a sentence with "Let's face it" and produce an encouraging sentiment.
Post by: DadJokes on September 17, 2021, 09:42:18 AM
I've always understood "let's face it" to mean "you need to face this", or "you need to come around to my way of thinking".
Either way, it sets a defeatist tone. Nobody is going to start a sentence with "Let's face it" and produce an encouraging sentiment.
"Let's face it, I'm amazing."
Boom.
Unless that's not encouraging. I suppose some people would be discouraged that I think that I'm amazing.
Post by: Travis on September 17, 2021, 09:57:19 AM
I've always understood "let's face it" to mean "you need to face this", or "you need to come around to my way of thinking".
Either way, it sets a defeatist tone. Nobody is going to start a sentence with "Let's face it" and produce an encouraging sentiment.
"Let's face it, I'm amazing."
Boom.
Unless that's not encouraging. I suppose some people would be discouraged that I think that I'm amazing.
"Let's face it" = "there's no point in arguing with me." It's defeatist, but context can change it to be a positive if I'm defeating you from whatever funk you're in.
Post by: Chaplin on September 17, 2021, 12:21:05 PM
"Let's face it" = "there's no point in arguing with me." It's defeatist, but context can change it to be a positive if I'm defeating you from whatever funk you're in.
Closely related to "Let's be honest..." Cleverly structured so that if you disagree with whatever they're saying it sounds like you're disagreeing with the need to be honest.
Post by: Jenny Wren on September 17, 2021, 01:15:48 PM
I always edit it out because a) it's repetitive, and b) it sounds patronizing to me, like the business owner is talking down to an immature and possibly stupid customer.
Post by: solon on September 17, 2021, 01:56:33 PM
Interesting anecdote: I write copy, and many of my clients are contractors in various trades -- plumbing, roofing, HVAC, etc. Whenever I'm hired to edit an existing website, a huge part of it is removing the "face it" intro that seems to be the norm for every single article on their business blogs. " You might as well face it, your AC will fail on the hottest day of the year;" "Face it, your garbage disposal will backup in the middle of Christmas dinner;" "Let's face it, shingles aren't what they used to be so you better get a metal roof."
I always edit it out because a) it's repetitive, and b) it sounds patronizing to me, like the business owner is talking down to an immature and possibly stupid customer.
Thank you for doing the Lord's work.
Post by: Dicey on September 17, 2021, 09:59:30 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on September 18, 2021, 05:55:59 AM
Post by: solon on September 18, 2021, 06:08:21 AM
Sure, it fits here! It's a phrase, and I agree, I wish it would go away! I like fall, and I say "y'all," but it's completely stupid to put them together like that.
I think she's talking about the apostrophe.
Post by: Dollar Slice on September 18, 2021, 08:15:36 AM
This doesn't quite fit here, but I had to share it somewhere and I knew y'all would understand...
What is it about f'a'll that makes people commit crimes with apostrophes? I spotted this one a few years ago.
Post by: Dicey on September 18, 2021, 11:21:39 AM
Yup.Sure, it fits here! It's a phrase, and I agree, I wish it would go away! I like fall, and I say "y'all," but it's completely stupid to put them together like that.
I think she's talking about the apostrophe.
Post by: GuitarStv on September 18, 2021, 06:14:37 PM
This doesn't quite fit here, but I had to share it somewhere and I knew y'all would understand...
If I apply some deductive forensic etymology I can maybe see the mental mechanics that led to that picture. Hear me out . . .
First we start out with "you all" which, while terrible English (should be "all of you" is a pretty common Southern US turn of phrase. Then we throw in some ebonicsish stuff for fun and it becomes "Ya all". And then we decide that the same contraction for will also works for all and you get "Ya'll".
It makes kinda sense?
Post by: nereo on September 18, 2021, 07:11:35 PM
This doesn't quite fit here, but I had to share it somewhere and I knew y'all would understand...
If I apply some deductive forensic etymology I can maybe see the mental mechanics that led to that picture. Hear me out . . .
First we start out with "you all" which, while terrible English (should be "all of you" is a pretty common Southern US turn of phrase. Then we throw in some ebonicsish stuff for fun and it becomes "Ya all". And then we decide that the same contraction for will also works for all and you get "Ya'll".
It makes kinda sense?
Are we sure it’s not just a strange spelling of the Yiddish ‘yalla’?
Post by: GreenSheep on September 19, 2021, 08:33:07 AM
Yup.Sure, it fits here! It's a phrase, and I agree, I wish it would go away! I like fall, and I say "y'all," but it's completely stupid to put them together like that.
I think she's talking about the apostrophe.
Wow. I can't believe I missed that. I think I was so appalled by the dumb rhyme that I overlooked the misplaced apostrophe that usually drives me nuts.
Post by: DadJokes on September 20, 2021, 05:02:05 AM
Is it y'all's? That looks abysmal.
Post by: Dicey on September 20, 2021, 05:46:50 AM
As a frequent user of y'all (it just rolls so well off the tongue), I do have one problem with the word: when it's used in the possessive form.Dunno, but I think it's hilarious that the plural of y'all is now apparently, "all y'all".
Is it y'all's? That looks abysmal.
Post by: Dancin'Dog on September 20, 2021, 07:14:28 AM
As a frequent user of y'all (it just rolls so well off the tongue), I do have one problem with the word: when it's used in the possessive form.Dunno, but I think it's hilarious that the plural of y'all is now apparently, "all y'all".
Is it y'all's? That looks abysmal.
You'uns is a plural form that's really funny. I hear it from very rural mountain (Appalachian) people.
Post by: Bateaux on September 20, 2021, 11:25:39 AM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on September 20, 2021, 12:53:00 PM
I posted this recently, the phrase, "please advise." Drives me crazy.What about that phrase rubs you the wrong way?
Post by: nessness on September 20, 2021, 12:55:03 PM
I posted this recently, the phrase, "please advise." Drives me crazy.Hmm, I use that regularly. Usually in emails to my manager - I describe the problem and end with "please advise."
What about it bugs you?
Post by: DadJokes on September 20, 2021, 01:33:46 PM
I posted this recently, the phrase, "please advise." Drives me crazy.
I'm lost as to what we should say instead.
Please advise.
Post by: solon on September 20, 2021, 01:53:02 PM
I posted this recently, the phrase, "please advise." Drives me crazy.
I'm lost as to what we should say instead.
Please advise.
"If it's all the same to you, kindly let me know what you would like me to do/think/say regarding this issue."
Post by: nessness on September 20, 2021, 02:16:14 PM
Thinking about it some more, I do have a coworker who follows questions with "please advise", e.g., "Who should I contact about this problem? Please advise." That annoys me a little bit because it feels redundant.I posted this recently, the phrase, "please advise." Drives me crazy.Hmm, I use that regularly. Usually in emails to my manager - I describe the problem and end with "please advise."
What about it bugs you?
Post by: Metalcat on September 20, 2021, 02:20:48 PM
Thinking about it some more, I do have a coworker who follows questions with "please advise", e.g., "Who should I contact about this problem? Please advise." That annoys me a little bit because it feels redundant.I posted this recently, the phrase, "please advise." Drives me crazy.Hmm, I use that regularly. Usually in emails to my manager - I describe the problem and end with "please advise."
What about it bugs you?
Yeah, I would find that redundancy annoying, but not the phrase if it's itself because it's nice and succinct.
Post by: dougules on September 20, 2021, 03:17:36 PM
Thinking about it some more, I do have a coworker who follows questions with "please advise", e.g., "Who should I contact about this problem? Please advise." That annoys me a little bit because it feels redundant.I posted this recently, the phrase, "please advise." Drives me crazy.Hmm, I use that regularly. Usually in emails to my manager - I describe the problem and end with "please advise."
What about it bugs you?
Yeah, I would find that redundancy annoying, but not the phrase if it's itself because it's nice and succinct.
On some level it sounds annoying to me too being kind of buzzword-y, but it is a really good idea to put what you want the reader to know or do as succinctly as possible right at the beginning or the end of an email, and not imbed it in a long string of text like I'm doing now. I actually had a boss who wanted us to put the take-away in the subject line if possible.
Post by: DadJokes on September 21, 2021, 07:08:14 AM
Thinking about it some more, I do have a coworker who follows questions with "please advise", e.g., "Who should I contact about this problem? Please advise." That annoys me a little bit because it feels redundant.I posted this recently, the phrase, "please advise." Drives me crazy.Hmm, I use that regularly. Usually in emails to my manager - I describe the problem and end with "please advise."
What about it bugs you?
Yeah, I would find that redundancy annoying, but not the phrase if it's itself because it's nice and succinct.
On some level it sounds annoying to me too being kind of buzzword-y, but it is a really good idea to put what you want the reader to know or do as succinctly as possible right at the beginning or the end of an email, and not imbed it in a long string of text like I'm doing now. I actually had a boss who wanted us to put the take-away in the subject line if possible.
I had to take a business communications class as part of my major in college. The professor said that you should always start your email with the request, then follow it up with any details.
Post by: Dicey on September 21, 2021, 07:14:57 AM
Post by: Metalcat on September 21, 2021, 07:17:47 AM
"Please advise" is a lot nicer than, "Give me the answer now, damn it!" It's better than "LMK". It politely and clearly lets the reader know that a reply is expected. Works for me.
But it would be ultra annoying seeing it redundantly tacked on to the end of every question.
Post by: Master of None on September 21, 2021, 09:07:54 AM
Post by: Dicey on September 21, 2021, 02:16:36 PM
I completely agree. I assumed that it was only used once, at the end of a communication."Please advise" is a lot nicer than, "Give me the answer now, damn it!" It's better than "LMK". It politely and clearly lets the reader know that a reply is expected. Works for me.
But it would be ultra annoying seeing it redundantly tacked on to the end of every question.
Post by: BlueHouse on September 26, 2021, 07:04:01 PM
I had to take a business communications class as part of my major in college. The professor said that you should always start your email with the request, then follow it up with any details.
I remember a lesson on this at some point in my career and the thing that stuck in my head was to avoid idioms, especially sports idioms. They gave some examples to avoid to be more inclusive for women (this was a long time ago) because some women and especially foreigners wouldn't know what "he hit a home run" or "we need a hail mary pass" meant. As part of the exercise, we had to substitute different idioms such as "the sales team really pulled off a triple axel with that deal". This example is in embedded in my memory forever because it's just so different from anything actually used in business.
Post by: merula on September 28, 2021, 10:25:19 AM
I remember a lesson on this at some point in my career and the thing that stuck in my head was to avoid idioms, especially sports idioms. They gave some examples to avoid to be more inclusive for women (this was a long time ago) because some women and especially foreigners wouldn't know what "he hit a home run" or "we need a hail mary pass" meant. As part of the exercise, we had to substitute different idioms such as "the sales team really pulled off a triple axel with that deal". This example is in embedded in my memory forever because it's just so different from anything actually used in business.
I'm completely behind that advice on sports metaphors, and after a few times where I was trying to make that point but the obscure metaphors continued (GTFO with "overclubbed").
I then described a business problem as "It's like a run in your hose. We need to just slap some clear polish on it to get through until lunch, and then deal with it."
The women nodded and I moved on without further explaining myself, and I think sitting with that confusion helped some of the men present to recognize why group-specific metaphors are problematic. (Not all, but what can you do.)
Post by: Metalcat on September 28, 2021, 10:29:39 AM
I remember a lesson on this at some point in my career and the thing that stuck in my head was to avoid idioms, especially sports idioms. They gave some examples to avoid to be more inclusive for women (this was a long time ago) because some women and especially foreigners wouldn't know what "he hit a home run" or "we need a hail mary pass" meant. As part of the exercise, we had to substitute different idioms such as "the sales team really pulled off a triple axel with that deal". This example is in embedded in my memory forever because it's just so different from anything actually used in business.
I'm completely behind that advice on sports metaphors, and after a few times where I was trying to make that point but the obscure metaphors continued (GTFO with "overclubbed").
I then described a business problem as "It's like a run in your hose. We need to just slap some clear polish on it to get through until lunch, and then deal with it."
The women nodded and I moved on without further explaining myself, and I think sitting with that confusion helped some of the men present to recognize why group-specific metaphors are problematic. (Not all, but what can you do.)
Love this. Love it so much.
ETA: I'm going to start going out of my way to use female gendered analogies from now on, and see what happens.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on September 28, 2021, 10:45:49 AM
I remember a lesson on this at some point in my career and the thing that stuck in my head was to avoid idioms, especially sports idioms. They gave some examples to avoid to be more inclusive for women (this was a long time ago) because some women and especially foreigners wouldn't know what "he hit a home run" or "we need a hail mary pass" meant. As part of the exercise, we had to substitute different idioms such as "the sales team really pulled off a triple axel with that deal". This example is in embedded in my memory forever because it's just so different from anything actually used in business.
I'm completely behind that advice on sports metaphors, and after a few times where I was trying to make that point but the obscure metaphors continued (GTFO with "overclubbed").
I then described a business problem as "It's like a run in your hose. We need to just slap some clear polish on it to get through until lunch, and then deal with it."
The women nodded and I moved on without further explaining myself, and I think sitting with that confusion helped some of the men present to recognize why group-specific metaphors are problematic. (Not all, but what can you do.)
Love this. Love it so much.
Oh yes. Brilliant.
Post by: GuitarStv on September 28, 2021, 12:12:35 PM
I remember a lesson on this at some point in my career and the thing that stuck in my head was to avoid idioms, especially sports idioms. They gave some examples to avoid to be more inclusive for women (this was a long time ago) because some women and especially foreigners wouldn't know what "he hit a home run" or "we need a hail mary pass" meant. As part of the exercise, we had to substitute different idioms such as "the sales team really pulled off a triple axel with that deal". This example is in embedded in my memory forever because it's just so different from anything actually used in business.
I'm completely behind that advice on sports metaphors, and after a few times where I was trying to make that point but the obscure metaphors continued (GTFO with "overclubbed").
I then described a business problem as "It's like a run in your hose. We need to just slap some clear polish on it to get through until lunch, and then deal with it."
The women nodded and I moved on without further explaining myself, and I think sitting with that confusion helped some of the men present to recognize why group-specific metaphors are problematic. (Not all, but what can you do.)
Love this. Love it so much.
Oh yes. Brilliant.
TIL - Clear nail polish fixes a run in hosiery!
Post by: sui generis on September 28, 2021, 12:29:58 PM
I remember a lesson on this at some point in my career and the thing that stuck in my head was to avoid idioms, especially sports idioms. They gave some examples to avoid to be more inclusive for women (this was a long time ago) because some women and especially foreigners wouldn't know what "he hit a home run" or "we need a hail mary pass" meant. As part of the exercise, we had to substitute different idioms such as "the sales team really pulled off a triple axel with that deal". This example is in embedded in my memory forever because it's just so different from anything actually used in business.
I'm completely behind that advice on sports metaphors, and after a few times where I was trying to make that point but the obscure metaphors continued (GTFO with "overclubbed").
I then described a business problem as "It's like a run in your hose. We need to just slap some clear polish on it to get through until lunch, and then deal with it."
The women nodded and I moved on without further explaining myself, and I think sitting with that confusion helped some of the men present to recognize why group-specific metaphors are problematic. (Not all, but what can you do.)
Love this. Love it so much.
Oh yes. Brilliant.
TIL - Clear nail polish fixes a run in hosiery!
I so very much love the thought of this as well!
Although....as a middle aged woman I was not familiar with this tactic either! I've only worn pantyhose about a half dozen times in my life if that, I think. Unless I'm unusual, I'd guess that anyone, women or men, in their 20s or 30s might not get it.
Post by: Metalcat on September 28, 2021, 01:20:14 PM
TIL - Clear nail polish fixes a run in hosiery!
Technically, it doesn't fix it, it just helps stop it from getting horribly worse with every movement. That's why it's a great business metaphor. There are so many instances in business where you need to stop the progression of the problem as much as possible immediately, but can't actually get to a solution any time soon.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on September 28, 2021, 01:50:08 PM
Post by: simonsez on September 28, 2021, 03:21:57 PM
As a guy, I love the idea of using that pantyhose analogy. (Somehow, I heard about that trick as a kid. No idea where/how/from whom, but ...)Agreed, I enjoy learning more about idioms of all backgrounds, usually good for an interesting wiki tangent and learn a little bit more about history, etymology, culture, etc.. Just there is a time and a place and a professional work environment is usually not the ideal setting as it can alienate and discourage collaboration.
Post by: iluvzbeach on September 28, 2021, 03:36:08 PM
Post by: Morning Glory on September 28, 2021, 03:41:02 PM
Post by: dandarc on September 28, 2021, 03:43:58 PM
We were at a picnic when visiting friends out of state and my son asked some boys if they wanted to play cornhole and they looked completely bewildered. I guess they don't call it that everywhere...(it's the game where you throw beanbags at a board with a hole in it, in case it's called something different where you are). Much amusement followed, on the part of the adults.I mean, it is the American Cornhole League that fills up half of the lesser ESPN networks' content these days, right?
Post by: Metalcat on September 28, 2021, 03:49:46 PM
We were at a picnic when visiting friends out of state and my son asked some boys if they wanted to play cornhole and they looked completely bewildered. I guess they don't call it that everywhere...(it's the game where you throw beanbags at a board with a hole in it, in case it's called something different where you are). Much amusement followed, on the part of the adults.
I literally never heard of this until my 30s and have never actually seen it in the wild, only on TV.
Post by: nereo on September 28, 2021, 04:58:56 PM
I remember a lesson on this at some point in my career and the thing that stuck in my head was to avoid idioms, especially sports idioms. They gave some examples to avoid to be more inclusive for women (this was a long time ago) because some women and especially foreigners wouldn't know what "he hit a home run" or "we need a hail mary pass" meant. As part of the exercise, we had to substitute different idioms such as "the sales team really pulled off a triple axel with that deal". This example is in embedded in my memory forever because it's just so different from anything actually used in business.
I'm completely behind that advice on sports metaphors, and after a few times where I was trying to make that point but the obscure metaphors continued (GTFO with "overclubbed").
I then described a business problem as "It's like a run in your hose. We need to just slap some clear polish on it to get through until lunch, and then deal with it."
The women nodded and I moved on without further explaining myself, and I think sitting with that confusion helped some of the men present to recognize why group-specific metaphors are problematic. (Not all, but what can you do.)
Love this. Love it so much.
Oh yes. Brilliant.
TIL - Clear nail polish fixes a run in hosiery!
I so very much love the thought of this as well!
Although....as a middle aged woman I was not familiar with this tactic either! I've only worn pantyhose about a half dozen times in my life if that, I think. Unless I'm unusual, I'd guess that anyone, women or men, in their 20s or 30s might not get it.
Hmm…. I think I’ve worn pantyhose about as often as you have in my life.
Personally I like to mix my sports metaphors or select some from way outside the ‘big 5’ sports. Who doesn’t appreciate a good curling metaphor to get the sales team motivated?
Post by: RWD on September 28, 2021, 04:59:20 PM
We were at a picnic when visiting friends out of state and my son asked some boys if they wanted to play cornhole and they looked completely bewildered. I guess they don't call it that everywhere...(it's the game where you throw beanbags at a board with a hole in it, in case it's called something different where you are). Much amusement followed, on the part of the adults.
I literally never heard of this until my 30s and have never actually seen it in the wild, only on TV.
I also hadn't heard of it until my 30s when I moved to the South. It's fairly popular down here.
Post by: sui generis on September 28, 2021, 05:35:58 PM
We were at a picnic when visiting friends out of state and my son asked some boys if they wanted to play cornhole and they looked completely bewildered. I guess they don't call it that everywhere...(it's the game where you throw beanbags at a board with a hole in it, in case it's called something different where you are). Much amusement followed, on the part of the adults.
I literally never heard of this until my 30s and have never actually seen it in the wild, only on TV.
I also hadn't heard of it until my 30s when I moved to the South. It's fairly popular down here.
I always thought it was a sexual act before I traveled to the south and Midwest and found out it was a popular family friendly game. Weren't Beavis and Butt-Head always making jokes about cornholes or cornholing someone? I managed to keep a straight face when someone told me there'd be Cornhole at a place we were going, but inside I was shocked and worried!
Post by: Dollar Slice on September 28, 2021, 05:52:08 PM
I always thought it was a sexual act before I traveled to the south and Midwest and found out it was a popular family friendly game. Weren't Beavis and Butt-Head always making jokes about cornholes or cornholing someone? I managed to keep a straight face when someone told me there'd be Cornhole at a place we were going, but inside I was shocked and worried!
That's how I grew up understanding that word (in the northeast). If someone asked underage boys to play cornhole I would have expected their parents to call the police.
Post by: Metalcat on September 28, 2021, 06:26:55 PM
We were at a picnic when visiting friends out of state and my son asked some boys if they wanted to play cornhole and they looked completely bewildered. I guess they don't call it that everywhere...(it's the game where you throw beanbags at a board with a hole in it, in case it's called something different where you are). Much amusement followed, on the part of the adults.
I literally never heard of this until my 30s and have never actually seen it in the wild, only on TV.
I also hadn't heard of it until my 30s when I moved to the South. It's fairly popular down here.
I always thought it was a sexual act before I traveled to the south and Midwest and found out it was a popular family friendly game. Weren't Beavis and Butt-Head always making jokes about cornholes or cornholing someone? I managed to keep a straight face when someone told me there'd be Cornhole at a place we were going, but inside I was shocked and worried!
Yes, to clarify my earlier post. I had never heard of cornhole the wholesome picnic game until my 30s, before then, I only understood it to be a sexual reference, thanks to Beavis and Butthead.
Post by: Morning Glory on September 28, 2021, 06:38:51 PM
We were at a picnic when visiting friends out of state and my son asked some boys if they wanted to play cornhole and they looked completely bewildered. I guess they don't call it that everywhere...(it's the game where you throw beanbags at a board with a hole in it, in case it's called something different where you are). Much amusement followed, on the part of the adults.
I literally never heard of this until my 30s and have never actually seen it in the wild, only on TV.
I also hadn't heard of it until my 30s when I moved to the South. It's fairly popular down here.
I always thought it was a sexual act before I traveled to the south and Midwest and found out it was a popular family friendly game. Weren't Beavis and Butt-Head always making jokes about cornholes or cornholing someone? I managed to keep a straight face when someone told me there'd be Cornhole at a place we were going, but inside I was shocked and worried!
Yes, to clarify my earlier post. I had never heard of cornhole the wholesome picnic game until my 30s, before then, I only understood it to be a sexual reference, thanks to Beavis and Butthead.
You know, I think the game might have been named after the Beavis and butthead reference??? I certainly was well into adulthood when I first heard the game called that, now that you mention it.
Post by: Morning Glory on September 28, 2021, 06:54:16 PM
I always thought it was a sexual act before I traveled to the south and Midwest and found out it was a popular family friendly game. Weren't Beavis and Butt-Head always making jokes about cornholes or cornholing someone? I managed to keep a straight face when someone told me there'd be Cornhole at a place we were going, but inside I was shocked and worried!
That's how I grew up understanding that word (in the northeast). If someone asked underage boys to play cornhole I would have expected their parents to call the police.
My kid is six years old and autistic, so it was pretty hilarious. I guess in Chicago they call it "bags" which isn't much better.
Both references are quite realistic. I used to do sedation for conoscopies and you could see corn in there, even if the patient claimed they hadn't eaten it for weeks and everything else was cleaned out.
Post by: sui generis on September 28, 2021, 07:03:56 PM
I always thought it was a sexual act before I traveled to the south and Midwest and found out it was a popular family friendly game. Weren't Beavis and Butt-Head always making jokes about cornholes or cornholing someone? I managed to keep a straight face when someone told me there'd be Cornhole at a place we were going, but inside I was shocked and worried!
That's how I grew up understanding that word (in the northeast). If someone asked underage boys to play cornhole I would have expected their parents to call the police.
My kid is six years old and autistic, so it was pretty hilarious. I guess in Chicago they call it "bags" which isn't much better.
Both references are quite realistic. I used to do sedation for conoscopies and you could see corn in there, even if the patient claimed they hadn't eaten it for weeks and everything else was cleaned out.
OMG, I now both regret having brought this up at all, but also appreciate knowing I was not the only one all this time.
Post by: Metalcat on September 28, 2021, 07:08:19 PM
We were at a picnic when visiting friends out of state and my son asked some boys if they wanted to play cornhole and they looked completely bewildered. I guess they don't call it that everywhere...(it's the game where you throw beanbags at a board with a hole in it, in case it's called something different where you are). Much amusement followed, on the part of the adults.
I literally never heard of this until my 30s and have never actually seen it in the wild, only on TV.
I also hadn't heard of it until my 30s when I moved to the South. It's fairly popular down here.
I always thought it was a sexual act before I traveled to the south and Midwest and found out it was a popular family friendly game. Weren't Beavis and Butt-Head always making jokes about cornholes or cornholing someone? I managed to keep a straight face when someone told me there'd be Cornhole at a place we were going, but inside I was shocked and worried!
Yes, to clarify my earlier post. I had never heard of cornhole the wholesome picnic game until my 30s, before then, I only understood it to be a sexual reference, thanks to Beavis and Butthead.
You know, I think the game might have been named after the Beavis and butthead reference??? I certainly was well into adulthood when I first heard the game called that, now that you mention it.
A quick etymology search doesn't seem to clarify which came first, the sexual meaning or the game meaning. The game is very old, but seems to have had a bunch of different names. Then somehow "cornhole" took over as the game name.
Why? Who fucking knows? Maybe it was dirty farm humour that tethered the name to the very old game for some strange reason, maybe they're unrelated.
Definitely curious.
Post by: Jouer on September 29, 2021, 10:31:50 AM
We were at a picnic when visiting friends out of state and my son asked some boys if they wanted to play cornhole and they looked completely bewildered. I guess they don't call it that everywhere...(it's the game where you throw beanbags at a board with a hole in it, in case it's called something different where you are). Much amusement followed, on the part of the adults.
I literally never heard of this until my 30s and have never actually seen it in the wild, only on TV.
Fellow Canadian here. I hadn't heard of the game until about 6-7 years ago when I was in the states attending a music festival and our camping neighbours were playing it. They were college kids from just out side NYC. (I kicked their asses)
I thought it was a new game....guess it's just a new-ish name. Interesting.
Post by: Kris on September 29, 2021, 11:28:19 AM
We were at a picnic when visiting friends out of state and my son asked some boys if they wanted to play cornhole and they looked completely bewildered. I guess they don't call it that everywhere...(it's the game where you throw beanbags at a board with a hole in it, in case it's called something different where you are). Much amusement followed, on the part of the adults.
I literally never heard of this until my 30s and have never actually seen it in the wild, only on TV.
Fellow Canadian here. I hadn't heard of the game until about 6-7 years ago when I was in the states attending a music festival and our camping neighbours were playing it. They were college kids from just out side NYC. (I kicked their asses)
I thought it was a new game....guess it's just a new-ish name. Interesting.
I had never heard of it until I was in my forties.
I snicker like a twelve-year-old boy every time I hear the name.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on September 29, 2021, 09:47:21 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on September 30, 2021, 08:41:12 AM
The Freakonomics Radio podcast ran a rebroadcast (from 2015) yesterday about what they call a verbal tic they encounter in their own interviews and in media everywhere: "That's a great question." I'm so glad they addressed one of my pet peeves and don't know how I missed it the first time around!
Post by: RWD on September 30, 2021, 08:48:59 AM
"That's a great question."
The Freakonomics Radio podcast ran a rebroadcast (from 2015) yesterday about what they call a verbal tic they encounter in their own interviews and in media everywhere: "That's a great question." I'm so glad they addressed one of my pet peeves and don't know how I missed it the first time around!
Haha, that is so common. Usually in response to things that are objectively not that great of questions, which dilutes the phrase for when an actually great question is asked.
Post by: GuitarStv on September 30, 2021, 08:59:05 AM
Post by: sui generis on September 30, 2021, 09:11:02 AM
Post by: GreenSheep on September 30, 2021, 10:20:58 AM
Oh, another great podcast I heard recently was this one, all about how English spelling became as weird as it is:
https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/corpse-corps-horse-and-worse/
Of course, now I want to read her book!
I have so much fun being a nerd. Other people have no idea what they're missing out on... or "out on what they are missing"...? :-) (Yes, for the supernerds, I could have just omitted both prepositions, but I think it's funnier this way.)
Post by: Hall11235 on September 30, 2021, 10:51:14 AM
At work it is only ever used just prior to a task being dumped by upper management onto not-upper managment: "Oh, I don't know, Jim. That progress reports sounds like it will be an extremely heavy lift for me right now. Do you think you could handle it?"
This is, of course, followed up by the classic "But, if you're too busy, I guess I can still handle it" immediately followed by a pregnant, expectant pause.
Basically, all business speak drives me insane because it seems to be universally used to only sound smarter than the people around you, or to somehow differentiate yourself: "Our widget development team is really doing a lot of upskilling this year to improve our interdepartmental efficiency."
Post by: GuitarStv on September 30, 2021, 03:28:05 PM
I don't know if this one has been spoken of yet, but the term 'Heavy Lift' makes me want to die.
At work it is only ever used just prior to a task being dumped by upper management onto not-upper managment: "Oh, I don't know, Jim. That progress reports sounds like it will be an extremely heavy lift for me right now. Do you think you could handle it?"
This is, of course, followed up by the classic "But, if you're too busy, I guess I can still handle it" immediately followed by a pregnant, expectant pause.
Basically, all business speak drives me insane because it seems to be universally used to only sound smarter than the people around you, or to somehow differentiate yourself: "Our widget development team is really doing a lot of upskilling this year to improve our interdepartmental efficiency."
Sounds like your widget team is deep diving into picking the low hanging hyperlocal fruit to leverage and align synergies. A value added growth-hack big data approach to strategic viral disrupting might help them pivot into a better paradigm shift going forward.
Post by: Morning Glory on September 30, 2021, 03:48:17 PM
I don't know if this one has been spoken of yet, but the term 'Heavy Lift' makes me want to die.
At work it is only ever used just prior to a task being dumped by upper management onto not-upper managment: "Oh, I don't know, Jim. That progress reports sounds like it will be an extremely heavy lift for me right now. Do you think you could handle it?"
This is, of course, followed up by the classic "But, if you're too busy, I guess I can still handle it" immediately followed by a pregnant, expectant pause.
Basically, all business speak drives me insane because it seems to be universally used to only sound smarter than the people around you, or to somehow differentiate yourself: "Our widget development team is really doing a lot of upskilling this year to improve our interdepartmental efficiency."
Sounds like your widget team is deep diving into picking the low hanging hyperlocal fruit to leverage and align synergies. A value added growth-hack big data approach to strategic viral disrupting might help them pivot into a better paradigm shift going forward.
I need to print this out and paste it to my fridge: it's very easy to stick to weight loss goals when feeling mildly nauseated.
Post by: sui generis on September 30, 2021, 05:29:32 PM
Post by: nereo on September 30, 2021, 05:53:09 PM
I don't know if this one has been spoken of yet, but the term 'Heavy Lift' makes me want to die.
At work it is only ever used just prior to a task being dumped by upper management onto not-upper managment: "Oh, I don't know, Jim. That progress reports sounds like it will be an extremely heavy lift for me right now. Do you think you could handle it?"
This is, of course, followed up by the classic "But, if you're too busy, I guess I can still handle it" immediately followed by a pregnant, expectant pause.
Basically, all business speak drives me insane because it seems to be universally used to only sound smarter than the people around you, or to somehow differentiate yourself: "Our widget development team is really doing a lot of upskilling this year to improve our interdepartmental efficiency."
Sounds like your widget team is deep diving into picking the low hanging hyperlocal fruit to leverage and align synergies. A value added growth-hack big data approach to strategic viral disrupting might help them pivot into a better paradigm shift going forward.
This goes here…
https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4 (https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4)
Post by: GreenSheep on October 01, 2021, 05:28:15 AM
Here's another one I hate: "Let's put a pin in that" when someone doesn't want to lose an off topic thread, but is not ready to address it in that moment. I don't know how widespread its usage is, actually. But Ezra Klein, one of my favorite interviewers/podcast hosts, waaaayyyy overuses this expression and it's the one thing I cringe about when I listen. I really hope it doesn't spread any further.
Ugh, yes, file that under "Overused Podcast Phrases," along with "Let's camp out here for a moment" (the opposite of "Let's put a pin in that," I suppose) and "It's almost time to land this plane."
Post by: GreenSheep on October 01, 2021, 05:53:13 AM
Post by: Hall11235 on October 01, 2021, 05:56:38 AM
I don't know if this one has been spoken of yet, but the term 'Heavy Lift' makes me want to die.
At work it is only ever used just prior to a task being dumped by upper management onto not-upper managment: "Oh, I don't know, Jim. That progress reports sounds like it will be an extremely heavy lift for me right now. Do you think you could handle it?"
This is, of course, followed up by the classic "But, if you're too busy, I guess I can still handle it" immediately followed by a pregnant, expectant pause.
Basically, all business speak drives me insane because it seems to be universally used to only sound smarter than the people around you, or to somehow differentiate yourself: "Our widget development team is really doing a lot of upskilling this year to improve our interdepartmental efficiency."
Sounds like your widget team is deep diving into picking the low hanging hyperlocal fruit to leverage and align synergies. A value added growth-hack big data approach to strategic viral disrupting might help them pivot into a better paradigm shift going forward.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on October 01, 2021, 06:24:13 AM
This doesn't quite fit the subject of this thread, but it's something people here would probably appreciate... "defiantly" in place of "definitely." Always in writing, because apparently people do know the difference when speaking. As in, "Yes, we are defiantly going to mow the lawn this weekend." The visual makes me laugh every time, regardless of the topic.Heh, now I'm imagining one of my kids refusing to get on the computer, and instead marching out the door in a huff to go mow the lawn.
Hey, a dad can dream, right? :P
Post by: teen persuasion on October 01, 2021, 07:29:22 AM
This doesn't quite fit the subject of this thread, but it's something people here would probably appreciate... "defiantly" in place of "definitely." Always in writing, because apparently people do know the difference when speaking. As in, "Yes, we are defiantly going to mow the lawn this weekend." The visual makes me laugh every time, regardless of the topic.In a similar vein, I keep tripping over "tax differed" in place of "tax deferred", all over Bogleheads. For some reason that one grates on me, more than it should (I agree that defiantly is amusing). My knee-jerk impulse is to correct them, but no one else mentions it, so I let it go. Yet, ROTH in place of Roth nearly always provokes multiple BH pleas to fix it - it's someone's name, not an acronym.
Post by: ObviouslyNotAGolfer on October 01, 2021, 08:38:59 PM
Are YOU READY FOR SOME FOOTBALL !?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?
The answer is NO. Does that mean you're going to physically assault me or call me a "fag" ?
'Murican football bores me to tears (soccer too actually). I would very honestly rather watch the grass grow. :p
Post by: ObviouslyNotAGolfer on October 01, 2021, 08:41:19 PM
Speed IS a rate! STFU!
I also hate it when people tell me, "I'm not materialistic." Really? OK but you are stupid (and a d1ck). (I'm thinking about a couple of people I know personally, not anyone here!) Nothing wrong with not being materialistic--I have been trying all year to get rid of junk (my dead parents' junk specifically) and I hate hoarding. Still, the whole "I'm not materialistic" thing seems to be just another form of bragging.
Post by: GreenSheep on October 02, 2021, 05:44:51 AM
"rate of speed"
Speed IS a rate! STFU!
I also hate it when people tell me, "I'm not materialistic." Really? OK but you are stupid (and a d1ck). (I'm thinking about a couple of people I know personally, not anyone here!) Nothing wrong with not being materialistic--I have been trying all year to get rid of junk (my dead parents' junk specifically) and I hate hoarding. Still, the whole "I'm not materialistic" thing seems to be just another form of bragging.
Ha, just like, "I hate drama," always said by those who are constantly inviting drama into their lives and trying to spread it to others.
Post by: GreenSheep on October 02, 2021, 05:55:25 AM
Post by: Dicey on October 02, 2021, 07:47:39 AM
Argh, I just got an email from a company I used to work for (somehow I'm still on their email list), in which they used the phrase "think thoughtfully." Should I also "look visually" and "speak vocally"? I swear people only succeed in making themselves seem dumber when they try to seem smart. (Also, this reminds me of, "I'm just speaking out loud." Is there any other way to speak...?"This reminds me of one of my accounts from my working days. Their dba was "Interior Flooring, Inc.", which always made me laugh. Yeah, good thing they delineated it from Exterior Flooring. They were great people and one of my best accounts, but damn, that dba cracked me up.
Post by: Dollar Slice on October 02, 2021, 10:05:45 AM
I swear people only succeed in making themselves seem dumber when they try to seem smart.
I remember seeing some professional foodie/chef type doing a restaurant review describe a good, tender steak as "fork and knife tender" and I still wonder sometimes what he eats steaks with normally, when they're not tender enough for the fork and knife treatment. Imagining him at the dinner table at home with a hacksaw, slicing off bites of ribeye. "It's good, honey, it's just not quite fork and knife tender."
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 02, 2021, 12:24:56 PM
I swear people only succeed in making themselves seem dumber when they try to seem smart.
I remember seeing some professional foodie/chef type doing a restaurant review describe a good, tender steak as "fork and knife tender" and I still wonder sometimes what he eats steaks with normally, when they're not tender enough for the fork and knife treatment. Imagining him at the dinner table at home with a hacksaw, slicing off bites of ribeye. "It's good, honey, it's just not quite fork and knife tender."
I heard something similar a long time ago, so not quite sure of the details, but I think it was a butter knife - and butter knives have no sharp edges. Or just fork tender, no knives involved. Because anything can be cut if the cutting tool is sharp and strong enough. If the hacksaw won't do it, we can haul out the chainsaw.
Post by: Kris on October 02, 2021, 12:38:17 PM
I swear people only succeed in making themselves seem dumber when they try to seem smart.
I remember seeing some professional foodie/chef type doing a restaurant review describe a good, tender steak as "fork and knife tender" and I still wonder sometimes what he eats steaks with normally, when they're not tender enough for the fork and knife treatment. Imagining him at the dinner table at home with a hacksaw, slicing off bites of ribeye. "It's good, honey, it's just not quite fork and knife tender."
I heard something similar a long time ago, so not quite sure of the details, but I think it was a butter knife - and butter knives have no sharp edges. Or just fork tender, no knives involved. Because anything can be cut if the cutting tool is sharp and strong enough. If the hacksaw won't do it, we can haul out the chainsaw.
Yes, that is the point: regular table/butter knife, not steak knife. My husband, who is an amazing cook, makes steak so tender there is no need to use a steak knife. When we were first together, I had a set of steak knives, and he did not. When merging our stuff, he wanted to get rid of them because we “didn’t need them.” (Which is absolutely true, but I still like using them.) To this day, whenever he makes steak, he gives me the stink-eye and makes a big (joking ) deal out of being offended by my choice of cutlery.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 02, 2021, 02:22:40 PM
I swear people only succeed in making themselves seem dumber when they try to seem smart.
I remember seeing some professional foodie/chef type doing a restaurant review describe a good, tender steak as "fork and knife tender" and I still wonder sometimes what he eats steaks with normally, when they're not tender enough for the fork and knife treatment. Imagining him at the dinner table at home with a hacksaw, slicing off bites of ribeye. "It's good, honey, it's just not quite fork and knife tender."
I heard something similar a long time ago, so not quite sure of the details, but I think it was a butter knife - and butter knives have no sharp edges. Or just fork tender, no knives involved. Because anything can be cut if the cutting tool is sharp and strong enough. If the hacksaw won't do it, we can haul out the chainsaw.
Yes, that is the point: regular table/butter knife, not steak knife. My husband, who is an amazing cook, makes steak so tender there is no need to use a steak knife. When we were first together, I had a set of steak knives, and he did not. When merging our stuff, he wanted to get rid of them because we “didn’t need them.” (Which is absolutely true, but I still like using them.) To this day, whenever he makes steak, he gives me the stink-eye and makes a big (joking ) deal out of being offended by my choice of cutlery.
Would he be willing to share his secrets? Sometimes I do the splurge and buy tenderloin, since steaks that are supposed to be tender end up not being that tender.
Of course if his secret requires a grill I am out of luck, because I can't have one in the apartment and in October they close the public ones.
Post by: Kris on October 02, 2021, 02:24:35 PM
I swear people only succeed in making themselves seem dumber when they try to seem smart.
I remember seeing some professional foodie/chef type doing a restaurant review describe a good, tender steak as "fork and knife tender" and I still wonder sometimes what he eats steaks with normally, when they're not tender enough for the fork and knife treatment. Imagining him at the dinner table at home with a hacksaw, slicing off bites of ribeye. "It's good, honey, it's just not quite fork and knife tender."
I heard something similar a long time ago, so not quite sure of the details, but I think it was a butter knife - and butter knives have no sharp edges. Or just fork tender, no knives involved. Because anything can be cut if the cutting tool is sharp and strong enough. If the hacksaw won't do it, we can haul out the chainsaw.
Yes, that is the point: regular table/butter knife, not steak knife. My husband, who is an amazing cook, makes steak so tender there is no need to use a steak knife. When we were first together, I had a set of steak knives, and he did not. When merging our stuff, he wanted to get rid of them because we “didn’t need them.” (Which is absolutely true, but I still like using them.) To this day, whenever he makes steak, he gives me the stink-eye and makes a big (joking ) deal out of being offended by my choice of cutlery.
Would he be willing to share his secrets? Sometimes I do the splurge and buy tenderloin, since steaks that are supposed to be tender end up not being that tender.
Of course if his secret requires a grill I am out of luck, because I can't have one in the apartment and in October they close the public ones.
He generally sous vides the steak and then gives it a quick pan sear on both sides at the end. Delectable.
Post by: Morning Glory on October 02, 2021, 06:41:57 PM
I swear people only succeed in making themselves seem dumber when they try to seem smart.
I remember seeing some professional foodie/chef type doing a restaurant review describe a good, tender steak as "fork and knife tender" and I still wonder sometimes what he eats steaks with normally, when they're not tender enough for the fork and knife treatment. Imagining him at the dinner table at home with a hacksaw, slicing off bites of ribeye. "It's good, honey, it's just not quite fork and knife tender."
I heard something similar a long time ago, so not quite sure of the details, but I think it was a butter knife - and butter knives have no sharp edges. Or just fork tender, no knives involved. Because anything can be cut if the cutting tool is sharp and strong enough. If the hacksaw won't do it, we can haul out the chainsaw.
Yes, that is the point: regular table/butter knife, not steak knife. My husband, who is an amazing cook, makes steak so tender there is no need to use a steak knife. When we were first together, I had a set of steak knives, and he did not. When merging our stuff, he wanted to get rid of them because we “didn’t need them.” (Which is absolutely true, but I still like using them.) To this day, whenever he makes steak, he gives me the stink-eye and makes a big (joking ) deal out of being offended by my choice of cutlery.
Would he be willing to share his secrets? Sometimes I do the splurge and buy tenderloin, since steaks that are supposed to be tender end up not being that tender.
Of course if his secret requires a grill I am out of luck, because I can't have one in the apartment and in October they close the public ones.
He generally sous vides the steak and then gives it a quick pan sear on both sides at the end. Delectable.
I don't know if I would like my meat that soft. I've tried beef tongue and I didn't like it because it was too mushy. I don't really like lunch meat, or most ground beef dishes, for the same reason. Meat that doesn't need chewing just seems weird.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 02, 2021, 07:58:03 PM
I swear people only succeed in making themselves seem dumber when they try to seem smart.
I remember seeing some professional foodie/chef type doing a restaurant review describe a good, tender steak as "fork and knife tender" and I still wonder sometimes what he eats steaks with normally, when they're not tender enough for the fork and knife treatment. Imagining him at the dinner table at home with a hacksaw, slicing off bites of ribeye. "It's good, honey, it's just not quite fork and knife tender."
I heard something similar a long time ago, so not quite sure of the details, but I think it was a butter knife - and butter knives have no sharp edges. Or just fork tender, no knives involved. Because anything can be cut if the cutting tool is sharp and strong enough. If the hacksaw won't do it, we can haul out the chainsaw.
Yes, that is the point: regular table/butter knife, not steak knife. My husband, who is an amazing cook, makes steak so tender there is no need to use a steak knife. When we were first together, I had a set of steak knives, and he did not. When merging our stuff, he wanted to get rid of them because we “didn’t need them.” (Which is absolutely true, but I still like using them.) To this day, whenever he makes steak, he gives me the stink-eye and makes a big (joking ) deal out of being offended by my choice of cutlery.
Would he be willing to share his secrets? Sometimes I do the splurge and buy tenderloin, since steaks that are supposed to be tender end up not being that tender.
Of course if his secret requires a grill I am out of luck, because I can't have one in the apartment and in October they close the public ones.
He generally sous vides the steak and then gives it a quick pan sear on both sides at the end. Delectable.
Sous vide - I've head great things about it. One more appliance for the small kitchen, oops - nope.
Post by: Kris on October 02, 2021, 08:31:25 PM
I swear people only succeed in making themselves seem dumber when they try to seem smart.
I remember seeing some professional foodie/chef type doing a restaurant review describe a good, tender steak as "fork and knife tender" and I still wonder sometimes what he eats steaks with normally, when they're not tender enough for the fork and knife treatment. Imagining him at the dinner table at home with a hacksaw, slicing off bites of ribeye. "It's good, honey, it's just not quite fork and knife tender."
I heard something similar a long time ago, so not quite sure of the details, but I think it was a butter knife - and butter knives have no sharp edges. Or just fork tender, no knives involved. Because anything can be cut if the cutting tool is sharp and strong enough. If the hacksaw won't do it, we can haul out the chainsaw.
Yes, that is the point: regular table/butter knife, not steak knife. My husband, who is an amazing cook, makes steak so tender there is no need to use a steak knife. When we were first together, I had a set of steak knives, and he did not. When merging our stuff, he wanted to get rid of them because we “didn’t need them.” (Which is absolutely true, but I still like using them.) To this day, whenever he makes steak, he gives me the stink-eye and makes a big (joking ) deal out of being offended by my choice of cutlery.
Would he be willing to share his secrets? Sometimes I do the splurge and buy tenderloin, since steaks that are supposed to be tender end up not being that tender.
Of course if his secret requires a grill I am out of luck, because I can't have one in the apartment and in October they close the public ones.
He generally sous vides the steak and then gives it a quick pan sear on both sides at the end. Delectable.
Sous vide - I've head great things about it. One more appliance for the small kitchen, oops - nope.
We have a very small kitchen, as well. Ours is about the size of a paper towel tube.
We use it at least once a week, though.
https://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/breville-joule-sous-vide/?catalogId=79&sku=3592319&cm_ven=PLA&cm_cat=Google&cm_pla=Electrics%20%3E%20Sous%20Vide®ion_id=765030&cm_ite=3592319&gclid=CjwKCAjwhuCKBhADEiwA1HegOf5phRl688Mf7NkiC2QGNhlncWI4pNmyTl_3bawhQ0IrOUjXosZs9xoC98MQAvD_BwE
Post by: Dollar Slice on October 02, 2021, 08:45:08 PM
We have a very small kitchen, as well. Ours is about the size of a paper towel tube.
Damn, and I thought *my* kitchen was small! ;-)
I pretty much have a total moratorium on kitchen appliances. I've switched to using a hand mixer instead of my stand mixer because it's just too much of a pain to carry my stand mixer in from the next room when I want to use it. It's like a 20% chance I'll throw my back out every time.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 03, 2021, 06:19:03 AM
We have a very small kitchen, as well. Ours is about the size of a paper towel tube.
We use it at least once a week, though.
https://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/breville-joule-sous-vide/?catalogId=79&sku=3592319&cm_ven=PLA&cm_cat=Google&cm_pla=Electrics%20%3E%20Sous%20Vide®ion_id=765030&cm_ite=3592319&gclid=CjwKCAjwhuCKBhADEiwA1HegOf5phRl688Mf7NkiC2QGNhlncWI4pNmyTl_3bawhQ0IrOUjXosZs9xoC98MQAvD_BwE
So it turns any pot into a sous vide unit? How does the food get into the bag? That must mean another piece of equipment?
Post by: nereo on October 03, 2021, 06:35:52 AM
We have a very small kitchen, as well. Ours is about the size of a paper towel tube.
We use it at least once a week, though.
https://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/breville-joule-sous-vide/?catalogId=79&sku=3592319&cm_ven=PLA&cm_cat=Google&cm_pla=Electrics%20%3E%20Sous%20Vide®ion_id=765030&cm_ite=3592319&gclid=CjwKCAjwhuCKBhADEiwA1HegOf5phRl688Mf7NkiC2QGNhlncWI4pNmyTl_3bawhQ0IrOUjXosZs9xoC98MQAvD_BwE
So it turns any pot into a sous vide unit? How does the food get into the bag? That must mean another piece of equipment?
They make special vacuum-seal bags and machines (that are roughly the size of a 3-hole punch) - but I’ve had equally good results just using freezer-style zip-lock bags. Or you can use silicone stasher bags. Plus, used carefully either are reusable.
Post by: Kris on October 03, 2021, 04:05:09 PM
We have a very small kitchen, as well. Ours is about the size of a paper towel tube.
We use it at least once a week, though.
https://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/breville-joule-sous-vide/?catalogId=79&sku=3592319&cm_ven=PLA&cm_cat=Google&cm_pla=Electrics%20%3E%20Sous%20Vide®ion_id=765030&cm_ite=3592319&gclid=CjwKCAjwhuCKBhADEiwA1HegOf5phRl688Mf7NkiC2QGNhlncWI4pNmyTl_3bawhQ0IrOUjXosZs9xoC98MQAvD_BwE
So it turns any pot into a sous vide unit? How does the food get into the bag? That must mean another piece of equipment?
They make special vacuum-seal bags and machines (that are roughly the size of a 3-hole punch) - but I’ve had equally good results just using freezer-style zip-lock bags. Or you can use silicone stasher bags. Plus, used carefully either are reusable.
Yes, exactly this.
Post by: nereo on October 03, 2021, 04:58:40 PM
We have a very small kitchen, as well. Ours is about the size of a paper towel tube.
We use it at least once a week, though.
https://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/breville-joule-sous-vide/?catalogId=79&sku=3592319&cm_ven=PLA&cm_cat=Google&cm_pla=Electrics%20%3E%20Sous%20Vide®ion_id=765030&cm_ite=3592319&gclid=CjwKCAjwhuCKBhADEiwA1HegOf5phRl688Mf7NkiC2QGNhlncWI4pNmyTl_3bawhQ0IrOUjXosZs9xoC98MQAvD_BwE
So it turns any pot into a sous vide unit? How does the food get into the bag? That must mean another piece of equipment?
They make special vacuum-seal bags and machines (that are roughly the size of a 3-hole punch) - but I’ve had equally good results just using freezer-style zip-lock bags. Or you can use silicone stasher bags. Plus, used carefully either are reusable.
Yes, exactly this.
For the minimalist kitchen, one doesn’t even need a sous vide device or vacuum bags. Sous vide cooking has been around for centuries, long before these gadgets*.
Just take your largest pot and a good thermometer. Fill the pot with water and heat until it reaches your target temperature (e.g. 130°F), then turn the burner way down low. Add the food inside a zip top bag and check back every 5-10 minutes - if the water temp has dropped, turn the burner up. If it’s warmer turn it down (or off). Repeat for an hour or so.
* cooks have been gently cooking meats immersed in hot liquid (“sous vide”) going back to at least the ancient romans. Instead of plastic bags used livestock intestines, and to keep the temperature constant they used truly massive pots and a lot of skill.
Post by: Kris on October 03, 2021, 05:07:35 PM
We have a very small kitchen, as well. Ours is about the size of a paper towel tube.
We use it at least once a week, though.
https://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/breville-joule-sous-vide/?catalogId=79&sku=3592319&cm_ven=PLA&cm_cat=Google&cm_pla=Electrics%20%3E%20Sous%20Vide®ion_id=765030&cm_ite=3592319&gclid=CjwKCAjwhuCKBhADEiwA1HegOf5phRl688Mf7NkiC2QGNhlncWI4pNmyTl_3bawhQ0IrOUjXosZs9xoC98MQAvD_BwE
So it turns any pot into a sous vide unit? How does the food get into the bag? That must mean another piece of equipment?
They make special vacuum-seal bags and machines (that are roughly the size of a 3-hole punch) - but I’ve had equally good results just using freezer-style zip-lock bags. Or you can use silicone stasher bags. Plus, used carefully either are reusable.
Yes, exactly this.
For the minimalist kitchen, one doesn’t even need a sous vide device or vacuum bags. Sous vide cooking has been around for centuries, long before these gadgets*.
Just take your largest pot and a good thermometer. Fill the pot with water and heat until it reaches your target temperature (e.g. 130°F), then turn the burner way down low. Add the food inside a zip top bag and check back every 5-10 minutes - if the water temp has dropped, turn the burner up. If it’s warmer turn it down (or off). Repeat for an hour or so.
* cooks have been gently cooking meats immersed in hot liquid (“sous vide”) going back to at least the ancient romans. Instead of plastic bags used livestock intestines, and to keep the temperature constant they used truly massive pots and a lot of skill.
This is very true. Of course, having a gadget makes it easier, but it is definitely possible to do it low-tech.
Post by: GuitarStv on October 05, 2021, 07:44:23 AM
Post by: Kris on October 05, 2021, 08:15:40 AM
Maybe I'm crazy, but the idea of cooking food in a plastic bag doesn't sit right with me.
There's nothing that says you need to use plastic.
https://kitchensnitches.com/can-you-cook-sous-vide-without-plastic-bags/
Post by: dougules on October 05, 2021, 09:59:24 AM
Maybe I'm crazy, but the idea of cooking food in a plastic bag doesn't sit right with me.
There's nothing that says you need to use plastic.
https://kitchensnitches.com/can-you-cook-sous-vide-without-plastic-bags/
I didn't see livestock intestines on there.
Post by: nereo on October 05, 2021, 10:11:28 AM
Covid cautious
Said twice about us this weekend because we are following basic CDC guidelines (basically wearing masks indoors in group settings). There frequently a subtle condescending message to it, like someone with a debilitating phobia.
People are still dying in large numbers and I’ve got multiple high-risk people in my family. Stop affixing a label on me as if I’m the unreasonable one. Our daycare keeps shutting down due to positive tests and we’ve burned through all our vacation and sick leave without ever actually getting a day off.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 05, 2021, 10:33:40 AM
Phrases I’d like to go away:
Covid cautious
Said twice about us this weekend because we are following basic CDC guidelines (basically wearing masks indoors in group settings). There frequently a subtle condescending message to it, like someone with a debilitating phobia.
People are still dying in large numbers and I’ve got multiple high-risk people in my family. Stop affixing a label on me as if I’m the unreasonable one. Our daycare keeps shutting down due to positive tests and we’ve burned through all our vacation and sick leave without ever actually getting a day off.
That's a new one. I'm reminded of Judge Judy's line "Beauty fades, dumb is forever". Of course, these days dumb is until you get sick and/or die.
Seriously, if someone said that to me, I would give a great big smile and say"Yup, I like being healthy". Or "I don't want to give it to my granddaughter". For you "Yup, I'm trying not to kill my grandparents".
It's like negging - "You are such a Insert word meant to be hurtful/negative here" meant to get you to change your behaviour. You could always tell them they sound like a 14 year old boy.
Sorry to be so militant, but I am just so over people who still don't get it. I haven't had my hair cut in 18+ months because I am vulnerable, simply because I have managed to live this long already.
Post by: Uturn on October 05, 2021, 11:21:58 AM
I just had a scoping call with a customer for a massive security transformation project. One of the requirements is seamless implementation, not a single user can be adversely affected. Um, no. That is just not possible. Or at least I have never seen it. However, I've only been doing IT since 95.
Let's go ahead and throw "giving 110%" in hear. That's not possible either.
Post by: Dollar Slice on October 05, 2021, 12:28:45 PM
Phrases I’d like to go away:
Covid cautious
Said twice about us this weekend because we are following basic CDC guidelines (basically wearing masks indoors in group settings). There frequently a subtle condescending message to it, like someone with a debilitating phobia.
I'm really grateful that my friends have been so nice about this. The friend I hang out with most in indoor situations (I only do everyone's-fully-vaccinated indoor stuff, but still wear a mask because of my personal medical issues) thanked me for the reminder that it's still important to wear a mask indoors, and he always wears one when we're together.
Even if someone does have a debilitating phobia or some kind of crippling anxiety, that's not something we should be mocking. That's really hard to live with, and they deserve sympathy and help.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on October 05, 2021, 01:24:48 PM
Phrases I’d like to go away:Is there another term you'd prefer people use when referring to someone who has a higher level of concern regarding Covid risks, and takes more steps to mitigate that risk? I'm sort of middle-of-the-road on the scale of "how concerned are you?", and the phrase "Covid cautious" seems pretty matter-of-fact and non-judgmental to me, particularly when you compare it to all the vitriolic "deniers"/"paranoids"/"reckless"/"fascist"/whatever epithets we see thrown about.
Covid cautious
Said twice about us this weekend because we are following basic CDC guidelines (basically wearing masks indoors in group settings). There frequently a subtle condescending message to it, like someone with a debilitating phobia.
People are still dying in large numbers and I’ve got multiple high-risk people in my family. Stop affixing a label on me as if I’m the unreasonable one. Our daycare keeps shutting down due to positive tests and we’ve burned through all our vacation and sick leave without ever actually getting a day off.
Post by: DadJokes on October 05, 2021, 01:33:35 PM
Phrases I’d like to go away:
Covid cautious
Said twice about us this weekend because we are following basic CDC guidelines (basically wearing masks indoors in group settings). There frequently a subtle condescending message to it, like someone with a debilitating phobia.
I'm really grateful that my friends have been so nice about this. The friend I hang out with most in indoor situations (I only do everyone's-fully-vaccinated indoor stuff, but still wear a mask because of my personal medical issues) thanked me for the reminder that it's still important to wear a mask indoors, and he always wears one when we're together.
Even if someone does have a debilitating phobia or some kind of crippling anxiety, that's not something we should be mocking. That's really hard to live with, and they deserve sympathy and help.
This upcoming rant is outside the scope of this thread, but...
Practically the only reason we still have to wear masks is because of the anti-vaxxers. Yes, there are people who medically can't get the vaccine, but if everyone who could get the vaccine got it, then the virus would be killing a lot less people. Vaccinated people are less likely to contract covid, less likely to spread it, and less likely to be hospitalized by it.
I'm not going to let the anti-vaxxers inconvenience my life any more than I absolutely have to. I'm going to wear a mask where I am legally and contractually required to, but nowhere else at this point.
Post by: sui generis on October 05, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
I feel like so few people use it in a way that could even possibly be correct (I do see it used sometimes where it's ambiguous) that I actually keep looking the word up every year or two to see if the accepted definition has changed just because at some point I guess I expect Merriam Webster and Oxford to just give in to the weight of popular usage. So far though, no. These people are still just wrong.
Post by: slackmax on October 05, 2021, 11:15:45 PM
Post by: frugalnacho on October 06, 2021, 08:03:00 AM
We were at a picnic when visiting friends out of state and my son asked some boys if they wanted to play cornhole and they looked completely bewildered. I guess they don't call it that everywhere...(it's the game where you throw beanbags at a board with a hole in it, in case it's called something different where you are). Much amusement followed, on the part of the adults.
I literally never heard of this until my 30s and have never actually seen it in the wild, only on TV.
I also hadn't heard of it until my 30s when I moved to the South. It's fairly popular down here.
I always thought it was a sexual act before I traveled to the south and Midwest and found out it was a popular family friendly game. Weren't Beavis and Butt-Head always making jokes about cornholes or cornholing someone? I managed to keep a straight face when someone told me there'd be Cornhole at a place we were going, but inside I was shocked and worried!
Yes, to clarify my earlier post. I had never heard of cornhole the wholesome picnic game until my 30s, before then, I only understood it to be a sexual reference, thanks to Beavis and Butthead.
You know, I think the game might have been named after the Beavis and butthead reference??? I certainly was well into adulthood when I first heard the game called that, now that you mention it.
A quick etymology search doesn't seem to clarify which came first, the sexual meaning or the game meaning. The game is very old, but seems to have had a bunch of different names. Then somehow "cornhole" took over as the game name.
Why? Who fucking knows? Maybe it was dirty farm humour that tethered the name to the very old game for some strange reason, maybe they're unrelated.
Definitely curious.
The bean bags are filled with dry corn kernels and are then thrown through a hole. Hence cornhole. I've also heard it referred to as bean bag toss, but cornhole is far more common.
Post by: youngwildandfree on October 06, 2021, 08:43:13 AM
Phrases I’d like to go away:Is there another term you'd prefer people use when referring to someone who has a higher level of concern regarding Covid risks, and takes more steps to mitigate that risk? I'm sort of middle-of-the-road on the scale of "how concerned are you?", and the phrase "Covid cautious" seems pretty matter-of-fact and non-judgmental to me, particularly when you compare it to all the vitriolic "deniers"/"paranoids"/"reckless"/"fascist"/whatever epithets we see thrown about.
Covid cautious
Said twice about us this weekend because we are following basic CDC guidelines (basically wearing masks indoors in group settings). There frequently a subtle condescending message to it, like someone with a debilitating phobia.
People are still dying in large numbers and I’ve got multiple high-risk people in my family. Stop affixing a label on me as if I’m the unreasonable one. Our daycare keeps shutting down due to positive tests and we’ve burned through all our vacation and sick leave without ever actually getting a day off.
I'm curious about this as well. I have used the term COVID cautious to refer to my friends and myself on occasion. Examples "I'm more COVID cautious this week because I'm going to see my immune compromised relative", "we plan to keep this gathering to 10 people because X person is COVID cautious and we want them to be comfortable" or "I am wearing a mask at this event because I'm COVID cautious due to the current local hospital strain". I've never thought of it as a negative term. Is there a better way to talk about this?
Post by: Morning Glory on October 06, 2021, 09:22:28 AM
Post by: DadJokes on October 06, 2021, 09:32:00 AM
I've had multiple people who I don't know well ask me where my child's hair color came from, since it's different than mine and my husband's. The first couple times I actually explained how that color runs in our families, but then I realized how rude this question really is. Maybe they don't realize it's rude? Just stop already.
Meh, we get the same question, and I don't really take offence. Two brunette parents with a blond child is odd. I just explain that I was blond as a child, but it changed over the course of my life.
It doesn't come across as rude to me. No one is insinuating that our child is adopted or conceived via an extramarital affair. Aside from hair color, he looks exactly like me. If anything, there might be some debate as to whether or not he's actually my wife's child and not just an exact clone of me.
I don't think we should consider questions like that as rude. People asking genuine questions is a good thing. We shouldn't be afraid of offending people when we ask about things.
Post by: Metalcat on October 06, 2021, 09:56:48 AM
I've had multiple people who I don't know well ask me where my child's hair color came from, since it's different than mine and my husband's. The first couple times I actually explained how that color runs in our families, but then I realized how rude this question really is. Maybe they don't realize it's rude? Just stop already.
Can you explain to me why it's rude? I can imagine some reasons, but I'm so used to people asking this of me and my mom since we look identical except that she's olive with dark eyes and a full afro of thick dark curly hair, and I'm ultra fair, blue eyed, and have fine, strawberry blonde hair. It's never occured to me to find the question rude, so I'm genuinely curious.
Post by: GreenSheep on October 06, 2021, 10:03:24 AM
I've been seeing a lot of use of the word "hue" when "color" would do just fine. I knew it didn't seem right, but I couldn't put my finger on exactly why until I found this article:
https://color-wheel-artist.com/hue/
Another reason to refrain from using a word unless you're sure you know its meaning. :-) Maybe this is overly picky, but you know... words... they mean things. If we start getting too sloppy with them, we'll just have a jumble of general terms without anything for specifics.
Post by: GuitarStv on October 06, 2021, 10:07:21 AM
Another one to file under "Making oneself seem dumber by attempting to seem smarter...'
I've been seeing a lot of use of the word "hue" when "color" would do just fine. I knew it didn't seem right, but I couldn't put my finger on exactly why until I found this article:
https://color-wheel-artist.com/hue/
Another reason to refrain from using a word unless you're sure you know its meaning. :-) Maybe this is overly picky, but you know... words... they mean things. If we start getting too sloppy with them, we'll just have a jumble of general terms without anything for specifics.
I think hue are just being picky.
Post by: Morning Glory on October 06, 2021, 10:43:40 AM
I've had multiple people who I don't know well ask me where my child's hair color came from, since it's different than mine and my husband's. The first couple times I actually explained how that color runs in our families, but then I realized how rude this question really is. Maybe they don't realize it's rude? Just stop already.
Can you explain to me why it's rude? I can imagine some reasons, but I'm so used to people asking this of me and my mom since we look identical except that she's olive with dark eyes and a full afro of thick dark curly hair, and I'm ultra fair, blue eyed, and have fine, strawberry blonde hair. It's never occured to me to find the question rude, so I'm genuinely curious.
I suppose I just don't know how to answer. Explain my family history? Give them a genetics lesson? Say it was the milkman?
Post by: Metalcat on October 06, 2021, 10:51:29 AM
I've had multiple people who I don't know well ask me where my child's hair color came from, since it's different than mine and my husband's. The first couple times I actually explained how that color runs in our families, but then I realized how rude this question really is. Maybe they don't realize it's rude? Just stop already.
Can you explain to me why it's rude? I can imagine some reasons, but I'm so used to people asking this of me and my mom since we look identical except that she's olive with dark eyes and a full afro of thick dark curly hair, and I'm ultra fair, blue eyed, and have fine, strawberry blonde hair. It's never occured to me to find the question rude, so I'm genuinely curious.
I suppose I just don't know how to answer. Explain my family history? Give them a genetics lesson? Say it was the milkman?
My mom says "my father was fair", which is true, but it comes more from my own father, but she prefers to pretend that I'm 100% from her genes, unless I'm pissing her off, in which case I'm "exactly like my father".
People never really care much when they ask stupid throw away questions like that. It's not even really a question, it's more of a comment "oh hey! Your kid is a totally different colour" but stated more as a question, I guess to seem more polite.
Most of the time they don't care about your answer, so you can say whatever you want. You could just shrug and say "genetics" and that would suffice.
Post by: GreenSheep on October 06, 2021, 10:55:53 AM
People never really care much when they ask stupid throw away questions like that. It's not even really a question, it's more of a comment "oh hey! Your kid is a totally different colour" but stated more as a question, I guess to seem more polite.
Most of the time they don't care about your answer, so you can say whatever you want. You could just shrug and say "genetics" and that would suffice.
I think people often ask a question because they want you to ask it back to them so they get to answer, because they find their own answer immensely interesting.
Post by: Metalcat on October 06, 2021, 10:59:15 AM
People never really care much when they ask stupid throw away questions like that. It's not even really a question, it's more of a comment "oh hey! Your kid is a totally different colour" but stated more as a question, I guess to seem more polite.
Most of the time they don't care about your answer, so you can say whatever you want. You could just shrug and say "genetics" and that would suffice.
I think people often ask a question because they want you to ask it back to them so they get to answer, because they find their own answer immensely interesting.
Sometimes, yeah, sometimes they're just not thinking much about it.
Post by: nessness on October 06, 2021, 12:14:08 PM
Post by: GuitarStv on October 06, 2021, 12:40:48 PM
My manager is always asking me to "craft an email", especially when it's an email to higher-ups. What's wrong with "write an email"? Or just "email"?
In my experience, writing an email designed for higher ups in the company typically involves a fair amount of crafting - the language you use needs to be carefully selected, the information you give depends based upon which person in upper management is destined to see it and what you know about them and how they react to people who bring them bad news, etc.
Email to co-worker on the project - "This project is fucked - everyone quit or jumped ship! There are only the two of us left on this doomed project, and we've got work for 14!"
Email to project lead - "The impact of recent personnel changes is going to cause us to miss key targets. While I appreciate your apparent confidence in the two of us, we will need to hire more people."
Email to department head - "The team is operating at peak productivity and efficiency. The initial budget and forecasting called for 14 resources over a 46 week period based on our story point estimates. Given that only two resources are currently allocated to the task, it seems unlikely that we'll be able to achieve our current milestones and schedule."
etc.
Post by: iris lily on October 06, 2021, 02:54:07 PM
Things like this make me cringe.
Post by: BlueHouse on October 08, 2021, 03:30:20 PM
I've had multiple people who I don't know well ask me where my child's hair color came from, since it's different than mine and my husband's. The first couple times I actually explained how that color runs in our families, but then I realized how rude this question really is. Maybe they don't realize it's rude? Just stop already.
Can you explain to me why it's rude? I can imagine some reasons, but I'm so used to people asking this of me and my mom since we look identical except that she's olive with dark eyes and a full afro of thick dark curly hair, and I'm ultra fair, blue eyed, and have fine, strawberry blonde hair. It's never occured to me to find the question rude, so I'm genuinely curious.
I suppose I just don't know how to answer. Explain my family history? Give them a genetics lesson? Say it was the milkman?
This is why:
https://www.opindia.com/2021/03/google-search-james-hewitt-prince-harry-real-father-charles-wales-princess-diana/
I'm the youngest child of 5. The first 4 were born in a 3.5 year span. then 2 years passed, then me. My brothers and sisters were all towheads and I had dark blonde/light brown hair. Anything anybody said to imply that there was anything different about me was extremely hurtful to me -- my entire life. Now in middle age, I finally don't care. But I can tell you from my experience, when anyone suggests that you're not part of the one thing in life where you should feel MOST secure, it's difficult.
Post by: Metalcat on October 08, 2021, 05:33:48 PM
I've had multiple people who I don't know well ask me where my child's hair color came from, since it's different than mine and my husband's. The first couple times I actually explained how that color runs in our families, but then I realized how rude this question really is. Maybe they don't realize it's rude? Just stop already.
Can you explain to me why it's rude? I can imagine some reasons, but I'm so used to people asking this of me and my mom since we look identical except that she's olive with dark eyes and a full afro of thick dark curly hair, and I'm ultra fair, blue eyed, and have fine, strawberry blonde hair. It's never occured to me to find the question rude, so I'm genuinely curious.
I suppose I just don't know how to answer. Explain my family history? Give them a genetics lesson? Say it was the milkman?
This is why:
https://www.opindia.com/2021/03/google-search-james-hewitt-prince-harry-real-father-charles-wales-princess-diana/
I'm the youngest child of 5. The first 4 were born in a 3.5 year span. then 2 years passed, then me. My brothers and sisters were all towheads and I had dark blonde/light brown hair. Anything anybody said to imply that there was anything different about me was extremely hurtful to me -- my entire life. Now in middle age, I finally don't care. But I can tell you from my experience, when anyone suggests that you're not part of the one thing in life where you should feel MOST secure, it's difficult.
Maybe it never bothered me because I'm one of 5 siblings and we all have different sets of parents through the many marriages along the way. So none of us look alike. One brother and I have the same colouring, but we look so incredibly different that people are shocked when they find out we're at all related.
Also, despite having totally different colouring and hair texture from my mom, we're so freakishly identical otherwise that people who have never met me, but who knew her at my age have been able to identify immediately who I am.
So comments on our different colouring were never taken as meaning that we don't look alike, because we do so much that it's stopped people in their tracks.
That's why it would never have occured to me to be an insensitive comment.
Post by: Dicey on October 09, 2021, 07:15:18 AM
My cousin and his wife are brunettes. Each of their children have a different shade of rich, red hair. Their paternal grandfather used to be known as "brick top". When #3 was very due, she took the older two on a nice long walk, hoping to get something moving. They encountered an older man who said, "What pretty little girls! They must look like their father." Ugh, what not to say to a nine-months-pregnant woman. It has, of course, become a running family joke.
I agree that such questions are merely conversation starters, the askers are not really interested in your family's genealogy.
Post by: GreenSheep on October 09, 2021, 08:01:57 AM
Post by: BlueHouse on October 10, 2021, 01:21:40 PM
Is there an alternative use of "editorial" as an adjective that I'm unaware of? I read a blog post in which the writer used "editorial" three times to describe interior design for Halloween, as in, "That made the room look so scary and editorial." I looked it up in an online dictionary, and I don't see any definition that would fit that use. This particular writer has gotten a lot of things wrong in the past, so I'm inclined to think she's just misusing the word, but maybe I'm the one who's out of the loop!
I used to watch America's Next Top Model, and they described the looks of models as either "editorial" or "commercial". Commercial meant they might make it in a Macy's catalog, while editorial meant Vogue or Cosmo. So I'd assume the writer meant it as somehow edgy. But I've never seen or heard it used that way either and it doesn't make much sense to me.
Post by: Metalcat on October 10, 2021, 02:46:17 PM
Is there an alternative use of "editorial" as an adjective that I'm unaware of? I read a blog post in which the writer used "editorial" three times to describe interior design for Halloween, as in, "That made the room look so scary and editorial." I looked it up in an online dictionary, and I don't see any definition that would fit that use. This particular writer has gotten a lot of things wrong in the past, so I'm inclined to think she's just misusing the word, but maybe I'm the one who's out of the loop!
I used to watch America's Next Top Model, and they described the looks of models as either "editorial" or "commercial". Commercial meant they might make it in a Macy's catalog, while editorial meant Vogue or Cosmo. So I'd assume the writer meant it as somehow edgy. But I've never seen or heard it used that way either and it doesn't make much sense to me.
Yeah, from what I understand, it basically means interior design that looks like it belongs in the pages of glossy magazines. So something that would be very heavily curated to fit an editorial esthetic.
So cute, homey Thanksgiving decorations would not be considered "editorial", but Kim Kardashian's pile of sickly-looking, grey painted pumpkins piled up by her stairs in her creepy empty house would have been "editorial" decor.
Post by: slackmax on October 18, 2021, 06:16:45 PM
Post by: MissNancyPryor on October 22, 2021, 02:04:47 PM
Doggos instead of dogs
Kiddos instead of kids
Niblings for nieces and nephews
Younglings for younger co-workers
My theory is that everything has to be softened, coddled, cajoled, and sweetened so as not to offend and to signal that the speaker feels they have a special relationship with the subject that cannot be captured in plain English.
I don't like having my linguistic meats cut up for me and this sort of pre-chewing gets annoying at times.
Post by: youngwildandfree on October 22, 2021, 02:39:21 PM
I don't know how long the trend has gone on but it is really common now. People have stopped saying simple words without using cutesy talk.
Doggos instead of dogs
Kiddos instead of kids
Niblings for nieces and nephews
Younglings for younger co-workers
My theory is that everything has to be softened, coddled, cajoled, and sweetened so as not to offend and to signal that the speaker feels they have a special relationship with the subject that cannot be captured in plain English.
I don't like having my linguistic meats cut up for me and this sort of pre-chewing gets annoying at times.
Or...these words are just fun to say. :D
Post by: merula on October 22, 2021, 02:47:14 PM
I don't know how long the trend has gone on but it is really common now. People have stopped saying simple words without using cutesy talk.
Doggos instead of dogs
Kiddos instead of kids
Niblings for nieces and nephews
Younglings for younger co-workers
My theory is that everything has to be softened, coddled, cajoled, and sweetened so as not to offend and to signal that the speaker feels they have a special relationship with the subject that cannot be captured in plain English.
I don't like having my linguistic meats cut up for me and this sort of pre-chewing gets annoying at times.
Niblings is so much shorter than "nieces and nephews", and also includes non-binary folks. My in-laws have three nephews and two nieces, but six niblings because one of my husband's cousins is non-binary.
And youngling is still below historical usage trends based on https://books.google.com/ngrams.
Post by: MissNancyPryor on October 22, 2021, 03:12:15 PM
Post by: iluvzbeach on October 22, 2021, 03:12:58 PM
Post by: Metalcat on October 22, 2021, 03:22:02 PM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 22, 2021, 04:19:24 PM
I actually like "niblings" it covers everyone in one word. Plus it has the advantage of being non-gendered.
Post by: sui generis on October 22, 2021, 04:32:48 PM
Post by: Dollar Slice on October 22, 2021, 04:45:39 PM
I don't mind "kiddo" but I don't like "littles"
"Littles" also gets on my nerves, but I don't have kids so I figure it's a fair exchange. I don't have to put up with raising toddlers, they get to annoy me with the word "littles."
Post by: nereo on October 22, 2021, 04:54:18 PM
Come to think of it, we have terms like newborn, infant, baby, toddler and the odd “big kid” to cover ages 0-5. But not much to describe 5-10 year olds, save their grade level (“kindergarteners”).
Post by: Metalcat on October 22, 2021, 05:21:13 PM
I rather like “littles” because it is an effective way of letting others know you are talking about small children. If someone just says “my children/niece/nephew/nibbling” that’s not much to know whether they are 5 or 15. A “little” is probably under the age of ~9.
Come to think of it, we have terms like newborn, infant, baby, toddler and the odd “big kid” to cover ages 0-5. But not much to describe 5-10 year olds, save their grade level (“kindergarteners”).
I don't like it because it was hugely popularized by ultra religious MLM moms. Also because it refers to a fetish where adults pretend to be children. This is popularly seen in "cam girls" who claim to have dissociative identity disorder and have an "alter" who is a child and then perform sex acts as that child.
So it just has too many wildly unpleasant associations for me and I cringe when I hear it.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 22, 2021, 06:10:18 PM
I rather like “littles” because it is an effective way of letting others know you are talking about small children. If someone just says “my children/niece/nephew/nibbling” that’s not much to know whether they are 5 or 15. A “little” is probably under the age of ~9.
Come to think of it, we have terms like newborn, infant, baby, toddler and the odd “big kid” to cover ages 0-5. But not much to describe 5-10 year olds, save their grade level (“kindergarteners”).
I don't like it because it was hugely popularized by ultra religious MLM moms. Also because it refers to a fetish where adults pretend to be children. This is popularly seen in "cam girls" who claim to have dissociative identity disorder and have an "alter" who is a child and then perform sex acts as that child.
So it just has too many wildly unpleasant associations for me and I cringe when I hear it.
Ick. Background is everything. I had no objection to "littles" before but I sure do now.
Actually I had seen it used in fiction - for anyone familiar with Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar, the Holderkin used it and Talia's main job was to look after the littles. Holderkin society was not something to be emulated. Arrows of the Queen was published in 1987, so did Lackey's use of "littles" predate the modern usage?
Sorry, I know that is a tangent, but it is always interesting to see the intersection between "real life" and fiction.
Post by: Morning Glory on October 22, 2021, 06:14:43 PM
I rather like “littles” because it is an effective way of letting others know you are talking about small children. If someone just says “my children/niece/nephew/nibbling” that’s not much to know whether they are 5 or 15. A “little” is probably under the age of ~9.
Come to think of it, we have terms like newborn, infant, baby, toddler and the odd “big kid” to cover ages 0-5. But not much to describe 5-10 year olds, save their grade level (“kindergarteners”).
I don't like it because it was hugely popularized by ultra religious MLM moms. Also because it refers to a fetish where adults pretend to be children. This is popularly seen in "cam girls" who claim to have dissociative identity disorder and have an "alter" who is a child and then perform sex acts as that child.
So it just has too many wildly unpleasant associations for me and I cringe when I hear it.
Wow, I hadn't heard either of those references before. " The Littles" was a children's book series about a family of tiny humans that live in the walls, so that's what I picture when I hear it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Littles
By the way, it took 27 clicks to get to the "Philosophy" page from that link!!!!
Post by: zolotiyeruki on October 24, 2021, 03:52:19 PM
Post by: Dicey on October 24, 2021, 05:09:27 PM
I don't know how long the trend has gone on but it is really common now. People have stopped saying simple words without using cutesy talk.The folks in the Land Down Under seem to shorten everything and I find it endlessly amusing. Sunnies, brekky, mozzies...I would bet the first two on your list are used there.
Doggos instead of dogs
Kiddos instead of kids
Niblings for nieces and nephews
Younglings for younger co-workers
My theory is that everything has to be softened, coddled, cajoled, and sweetened so as not to offend and to signal that the speaker feels they have a special relationship with the subject that cannot be captured in plain English.
I don't like having my linguistic meats cut up for me and this sort of pre-chewing gets annoying at times.
My cousin has a non-binary offspring, so I am hereby comandeering "niblings". I think it will be quite useful.
As to the last one, reason #859257 to savor the joys of FIRE...
Post by: nereo on October 24, 2021, 05:44:15 PM
Example: it was Johnny who scored the game-winning goal in their 4-3 March
It’s always seemed weird that one point (out of many) is highlighted as the key score in what’s supposed to be a team (group) sport. It’s even weirder when the final score wasn’t particularly close but one player is still designated to have scored “the winning point”. Recently I heard sportscasters talk about the player who scored the game winning run in what was ultimately a 9-2 romp. Apparently runs 1 & 2 weren’t particularly important and runs 4-9 were just footnotes.
Post by: dougules on October 24, 2021, 11:07:15 PM
My cousin has a non-binary offspring, so I am hereby comandeering "niblings". I think it will be quite useful.
You already have a non-gendered word for your cousin's child, and that is "cousin." Your cousin's children are also your cousins (once removed) and fortunately in English that's already a non-gendered word.
Post by: merula on October 25, 2021, 07:38:18 AM
My cousin has a non-binary offspring, so I am hereby comandeering "niblings". I think it will be quite useful.
You already have a non-gendered word for your cousin's child, and that is "cousin." Your cousin's children are also your cousins (once removed) and fortunately in English that's already a non-gendered word.
Perhaps Dicey has cause to refer to the niblings of their cousins, assuming that the parent of the nonbinary child has siblings. "Hey, good news, you can stop saying 'nieces and nephews and Alex, I have a new word for you".
Post by: youngwildandfree on October 25, 2021, 09:15:29 AM
My cousin has a non-binary offspring, so I am hereby comandeering "niblings". I think it will be quite useful.
You already have a non-gendered word for your cousin's child, and that is "cousin." Your cousin's children are also your cousins (once removed) and fortunately in English that's already a non-gendered word.
Perhaps Dicey has cause to refer to the niblings of their cousins, assuming that the parent of the nonbinary child has siblings. "Hey, good news, you can stop saying 'nieces and nephews and Alex, I have a new word for you".
I also refer to my cousin's children as my nieces in some company. It is much simpler than saying "my cousin's children that I have a close connection with and see much more regularly than my other cousins" or some such nonsense.
Post by: Jenny Wren on October 25, 2021, 09:58:19 AM
Niblings is new to me. Not sure how I feel about it, it sounds very close to Nibbler (from Futurama).
Post by: Dicey on October 25, 2021, 11:43:07 AM
Yup.My cousin has a non-binary offspring, so I am hereby comandeering "niblings". I think it will be quite useful.
You already have a non-gendered word for your cousin's child, and that is "cousin." Your cousin's children are also your cousins (once removed) and fortunately in English that's already a non-gendered word.
Perhaps Dicey has cause to refer to the niblings of their cousins, assuming that the parent of the nonbinary child has siblings. "Hey, good news, you can stop saying 'nieces and nephews and Alex, I have a new word for you".
I also refer to my cousin's children as my nieces in some company. It is much simpler than saying "my cousin's children that I have a close connection with and see much more regularly than my other cousins" or some such nonsense.
Post by: dougules on October 25, 2021, 12:07:13 PM
Yup.My cousin has a non-binary offspring, so I am hereby comandeering "niblings". I think it will be quite useful.
You already have a non-gendered word for your cousin's child, and that is "cousin." Your cousin's children are also your cousins (once removed) and fortunately in English that's already a non-gendered word.
Perhaps Dicey has cause to refer to the niblings of their cousins, assuming that the parent of the nonbinary child has siblings. "Hey, good news, you can stop saying 'nieces and nephews and Alex, I have a new word for you".
I also refer to my cousin's children as my nieces in some company. It is much simpler than saying "my cousin's children that I have a close connection with and see much more regularly than my other cousins" or some such nonsense.
I get it, but just going with the actual relationship, cousins, is the easiest way out of trying to navigate gendered terms if they're not actually the children of a sibling.
Post by: GreenSheep on October 31, 2021, 11:56:54 AM
Closely related: Interviewers who start with, "Let me ask you this..."
Post by: DadJokes on November 01, 2021, 01:07:41 PM
In speech and in writing: starting a question with the word "question." That's what the "question words" (who, what, when, where, why, how) are for... and the "?" when writing. (And in Spanish, it's even easier! You get an upside down question mark at the beginning of a written question AND a regular one at the end!) It always reminds me of that one annoying kid in my elementary school class who frequently shot his hand into the air and simultaneously yelled out, "I have a question!!!" (Right idea, not quite correct execution, but one can be forgiven when one is nine years old.)
Closely related: Interviewers who start with, "Let me ask you this..."
I think it's said to prepare the recipient for the upcoming question. I've often found that people don't pay very close attention most of the time and frequently need things repeated. However, if I say their name or let them know that a question is coming, they are more likely to actually listen.
Alternatively, maybe they really like the Office and just channeling their inner Dwight.
Post by: Kris on November 01, 2021, 01:17:54 PM
In speech and in writing: starting a question with the word "question." That's what the "question words" (who, what, when, where, why, how) are for... and the "?" when writing. (And in Spanish, it's even easier! You get an upside down question mark at the beginning of a written question AND a regular one at the end!) It always reminds me of that one annoying kid in my elementary school class who frequently shot his hand into the air and simultaneously yelled out, "I have a question!!!" (Right idea, not quite correct execution, but one can be forgiven when one is nine years old.)
Closely related: Interviewers who start with, "Let me ask you this..."
I think it's said to prepare the recipient for the upcoming question. I've often found that people don't pay very close attention most of the time and frequently need things repeated. However, if I say their name or let them know that a question is coming, they are more likely to actually listen.
Alternatively, maybe they really like the Office and just channeling their inner Dwight.
Plus, people use discourse markers (that's one of the terms for this) for lots of reasons, including to soften what is to come, to improve conversational flow, etc. etc. It's a common, human thing to do. People say they hate them, but I'd argue that if you had very many conversations with people who didn't use them at all, you would come away with the feeling that those people/conversations felt stilted, artificial, and off-putting.
Post by: GreenSheep on November 01, 2021, 03:53:09 PM
In speech and in writing: starting a question with the word "question." That's what the "question words" (who, what, when, where, why, how) are for... and the "?" when writing. (And in Spanish, it's even easier! You get an upside down question mark at the beginning of a written question AND a regular one at the end!) It always reminds me of that one annoying kid in my elementary school class who frequently shot his hand into the air and simultaneously yelled out, "I have a question!!!" (Right idea, not quite correct execution, but one can be forgiven when one is nine years old.)
Closely related: Interviewers who start with, "Let me ask you this..."
I think it's said to prepare the recipient for the upcoming question. I've often found that people don't pay very close attention most of the time and frequently need things repeated. However, if I say their name or let them know that a question is coming, they are more likely to actually listen.
Alternatively, maybe they really like the Office and just channeling their inner Dwight.
That seems insulting to a listener/reader who IS paying attention. I wouldn't want someone to assume I'm not listening or not reading carefully. I'm sorry you find yourself dealing with such rude people!
I really don't like it when people throw my name randomly into a conversation; I feel like I'm listening to a used car salesperson. It's fine if it's a group situation and they want me to know the question is directed at me, but when it's a one-on-one conversation, it just feels fake to me. Maybe the one time it seems nice is when you've just met someone, had a little conversation, and are going your separate ways... if they say, "Have a nice evening, Name!" then it lets me know they remembered my name, which is nice.
Post by: GreenSheep on November 01, 2021, 03:59:49 PM
In speech and in writing: starting a question with the word "question." That's what the "question words" (who, what, when, where, why, how) are for... and the "?" when writing. (And in Spanish, it's even easier! You get an upside down question mark at the beginning of a written question AND a regular one at the end!) It always reminds me of that one annoying kid in my elementary school class who frequently shot his hand into the air and simultaneously yelled out, "I have a question!!!" (Right idea, not quite correct execution, but one can be forgiven when one is nine years old.)
Closely related: Interviewers who start with, "Let me ask you this..."
I think it's said to prepare the recipient for the upcoming question. I've often found that people don't pay very close attention most of the time and frequently need things repeated. However, if I say their name or let them know that a question is coming, they are more likely to actually listen.
Alternatively, maybe they really like the Office and just channeling their inner Dwight.
Plus, people use discourse markers (that's one of the terms for this) for lots of reasons, including to soften what is to come, to improve conversational flow, etc. etc. It's a common, human thing to do. People say they hate them, but I'd argue that if you had very many conversations with people who didn't use them at all, you would come away with the feeling that those people/conversations felt stilted, artificial, and off-putting.
I think I see (part of?) your point, and things like "well" and "so" and "you know" only bother me when they're used excessively. I'm very aware that I say all of those things and more! I think something like "Question... How did you manage to retire so early?" bothers me because it seems more intentional than "Well, how did you manage to retire so early?" It also seems jarring to me. Alert! Alert! I'm about to ask you a question! Just in case you're too stupid to figure it out by the "how" and the change in voice at the end of the sentence! That, to me, seems stilted, artificial, and off-putting.
Post by: Metalcat on November 01, 2021, 04:11:41 PM
In speech and in writing: starting a question with the word "question." That's what the "question words" (who, what, when, where, why, how) are for... and the "?" when writing. (And in Spanish, it's even easier! You get an upside down question mark at the beginning of a written question AND a regular one at the end!) It always reminds me of that one annoying kid in my elementary school class who frequently shot his hand into the air and simultaneously yelled out, "I have a question!!!" (Right idea, not quite correct execution, but one can be forgiven when one is nine years old.)
Closely related: Interviewers who start with, "Let me ask you this..."
I think it's said to prepare the recipient for the upcoming question. I've often found that people don't pay very close attention most of the time and frequently need things repeated. However, if I say their name or let them know that a question is coming, they are more likely to actually listen.
Alternatively, maybe they really like the Office and just channeling their inner Dwight.
Plus, people use discourse markers (that's one of the terms for this) for lots of reasons, including to soften what is to come, to improve conversational flow, etc. etc. It's a common, human thing to do. People say they hate them, but I'd argue that if you had very many conversations with people who didn't use them at all, you would come away with the feeling that those people/conversations felt stilted, artificial, and off-putting.
Yes, I had to learn to introduce questions to staff members instead of just asking questions because they found the straight-to-the-point question hostile.
Once I added a friendly little "uh, question" with a raised finger, my questions were received as much more congenial.
So walking up to someone and saying "where did you put my case box?" doesn't go over nearly as well as "uh, question" pause "where did you put my case box?"
Apparently the first question formation sounds like an accusation, and the second sounds like a request for help.
Post by: Kris on November 01, 2021, 04:16:45 PM
In speech and in writing: starting a question with the word "question." That's what the "question words" (who, what, when, where, why, how) are for... and the "?" when writing. (And in Spanish, it's even easier! You get an upside down question mark at the beginning of a written question AND a regular one at the end!) It always reminds me of that one annoying kid in my elementary school class who frequently shot his hand into the air and simultaneously yelled out, "I have a question!!!" (Right idea, not quite correct execution, but one can be forgiven when one is nine years old.)
Closely related: Interviewers who start with, "Let me ask you this..."
I think it's said to prepare the recipient for the upcoming question. I've often found that people don't pay very close attention most of the time and frequently need things repeated. However, if I say their name or let them know that a question is coming, they are more likely to actually listen.
Alternatively, maybe they really like the Office and just channeling their inner Dwight.
Plus, people use discourse markers (that's one of the terms for this) for lots of reasons, including to soften what is to come, to improve conversational flow, etc. etc. It's a common, human thing to do. People say they hate them, but I'd argue that if you had very many conversations with people who didn't use them at all, you would come away with the feeling that those people/conversations felt stilted, artificial, and off-putting.
Yes, I had to learn to introduce questions to staff members instead of just asking questions because they found the straight-to-the-point question hostile.
Once I added a friendly little "uh, question" with a raised finger, my questions were received as much more congenial.
So walking up to someone and saying "where did you put my case box?" doesn't go over nearly as well as "uh, question" pause "where did you put my case box?"
Apparently the first question formation sounds like an accusation, and the second sounds like a request for help.
There ya go.
Post by: shelivesthedream on November 02, 2021, 01:44:45 AM
I think most people who "hate" these socially functional words and noises do actually use them themselves, they just hate the ones that other people use (or ones which have very suddenly become fashionable - e.g. "So, like..." a little while ago) and are blind to their own verbal tics. Now that we have an older toddler, I have become excruciatingly aware of my own pet phrases and verbal tics because he has picked them up exactly and uses them liberally.
Post by: GreenSheep on November 02, 2021, 05:55:00 AM
I see a lot of these conversational fillers, softeners or redirects as giving the person time to shift mental gears. Malcat's example is a perfect one - walking up to someone and immediately launching into a question is a bit startling if they're engaged in something else. Starting off with "Could I ask you a quick question?" lets them move from whatever-they-were-doing mode to answering-question mode. And the same thing often happens in the midst of a conversation - you want to change gears or topic or whatever. Obviously it's frustrating when they're used every second sentence, or when they "announce" a non-event, but they are useful.
Yes, this makes perfect sense. I can see how blindsiding someone with a question that could seem accusatory could cause problems. Somehow a phrase like, "I wonder..." or "I'm confused about something..." or even "Could you explain this to me?" followed by a question seems more natural and flows better than just, "Question!" ... even though I realize those are all technically unnecessary, too. Tone and body language help a lot, too, when trying to avoid sounding like an interrogator.
Post by: BlueHouse on November 08, 2021, 09:11:54 AM
In speech and in writing: starting a question with the word "question." That's what the "question words" (who, what, when, where, why, how) are for... and the "?" when writing. (And in Spanish, it's even easier! You get an upside down question mark at the beginning of a written question AND a regular one at the end!) It always reminds me of that one annoying kid in my elementary school class who frequently shot his hand into the air and simultaneously yelled out, "I have a question!!!" (Right idea, not quite correct execution, but one can be forgiven when one is nine years old.)
Closely related: Interviewers who start with, "Let me ask you this..."
I think it's said to prepare the recipient for the upcoming question. I've often found that people don't pay very close attention most of the time and frequently need things repeated. However, if I say their name or let them know that a question is coming, they are more likely to actually listen.
Alternatively, maybe they really like the Office and just channeling their inner Dwight.
Plus, people use discourse markers (that's one of the terms for this) for lots of reasons, including to soften what is to come, to improve conversational flow, etc. etc. It's a common, human thing to do. People say they hate them, but I'd argue that if you had very many conversations with people who didn't use them at all, you would come away with the feeling that those people/conversations felt stilted, artificial, and off-putting.
Also, in a male-dominated industry with a lot of loud men in a meeting, announcing "question" in the middle of an animated discussion somehow makes the men stop and listen and consider what I'm saying. When I just move directly into my point or my question, they don't seem to stop talking over everyone else. It may be that I'm willing to shout out "Question!" where if I shouted the entire question to be heard, I'd seem shrill. But it has worked for me for years.
Post by: slackmax on November 17, 2021, 09:00:33 AM
Is it supposed to be seen as clever or cute? I guess it's supposed to annoy you so remember Blue Cross.
Post by: GreenSheep on November 17, 2021, 10:33:31 AM
The use of a noun as a verb. As in "Think of Blue Cross this year when you Medicare!"
Is it supposed to be seen as clever or cute? I guess it's supposed to annoy you so remember Blue Cross.
Yes! And the use of a verb as a noun, as in, "It's a big ask." We already have a perfectly good word for that! "Request" is only one syllable longer, and it will never get you in trouble because someone thought you said, "big ass."
Speaking of verbs and nouns, I wonder if the incessant screwing up of lay/lie has anything to do with wanting to avoid saying "lie" because it also means "an untruth," which sounds negative, even though in context, anyone with half a brain would be able to figure out that honesty has nothing to do with it when you say, "I'm tired, so I'm going to go lie down for a little while." Otherwise, I just don't understand why people have such trouble with lay/lie, but I suspect it's a self-perpetuating thing at this point because for native speakers, most grammar comes from, "Well, it just sounds right." (I mean, that's how I did my English homework. Thankfully it was almost always correct because I had been spoken to by proper English speakers at home, school, etc. French homework, on the other hand, required memorizing grammar rules because the only native French speaker I knew was my teacher.) So if you constantly hear everyone say something wrong, "wrong" starts to sound "right."
Post by: MissNancyPryor on November 17, 2021, 11:57:17 AM
I have just seen another headline that says something like: "There might be more snow this year. Here's why."
or
"Turkey dinners will be handed out next week. Here's what you need to know."
WTAF with all the "Here's" tags? Constant. Everywhere. Such obvious trend-speak that adds nothing and has a cloying, head-patting quality to it that distracts me every time. Gee, I would not have known that reading an article about something might include information about that thing! HERE it is at last!
Lop off that stupid and unnecessary tag.
End rant.
Post by: Dave1442397 on November 17, 2021, 12:10:31 PM
Is it a midwestern thing? The people I've come across who say it that way have all been from Chicago or Wichita. They also say "acrost" instead of across.
Post by: Kris on November 17, 2021, 12:26:59 PM
"It needs fixed". A co-worker uses this phrase all the time, and I want to yell "No! It needs to be fixed!".
Is it a midwestern thing? The people I've come across who say it that way have all been from Chicago or Wichita. They also say "acrost" instead of across.
I have always hated that, too. I do believe it's a Midwestern thing. I've heard it all my life.
Post by: Dicey on November 17, 2021, 12:37:04 PM
Ugh."It needs fixed". A co-worker uses this phrase all the time, and I want to yell "No! It needs to be fixed!".
Is it a midwestern thing? The people I've come across who say it that way have all been from Chicago or Wichita. They also say "acrost" instead of across.
I have always hated that, too. I do believe it's a Midwestern thing. I've heard it all my life.
Post by: RWD on November 17, 2021, 12:42:37 PM
Alright, I am cranky.
I have just seen another headline that says something like: "There might be more snow this year. Here's why."
or
"Turkey dinners will be handed out next week. Here's what you need to know."
WTAF with all the "Here's" tags? Constant. Everywhere. Such obvious trend-speak that adds nothing and has a cloying, head-patting quality to it that distracts me every time. Gee, I would not have known that reading an article about something might include information about that thing! HERE it is at last!
Lop off that stupid and unnecessary tag.
End rant.
Hear! Hear!
Post by: MissNancyPryor on November 17, 2021, 12:51:58 PM
Alright, I am cranky.
I have just seen another headline that says something like: "There might be more snow this year. Here's why."
or
"Turkey dinners will be handed out next week. Here's what you need to know."
WTAF with all the "Here's" tags? Constant. Everywhere. Such obvious trend-speak that adds nothing and has a cloying, head-patting quality to it that distracts me every time. Gee, I would not have known that reading an article about something might include information about that thing! HERE it is at last!
Lop off that stupid and unnecessary tag.
End rant.
Hear! Hear!
Here! Here!
Post by: Taran Wanderer on November 17, 2021, 03:33:07 PM
Alright, I am cranky.
I have just seen another headline that says something like: "There might be more snow this year. Here's why."
or
"Turkey dinners will be handed out next week. Here's what you need to know."
WTAF with all the "Here's" tags? Constant. Everywhere. Such obvious trend-speak that adds nothing and has a cloying, head-patting quality to it that distracts me every time. Gee, I would not have known that reading an article about something might include information about that thing! HERE it is at last!
Lop off that stupid and unnecessary tag.
End rant.
Hear! Hear!
Here! Here!
Um, check this out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear)
Post by: MissNancyPryor on November 17, 2021, 04:08:01 PM
Alright, I am cranky.
I have just seen another headline that says something like: "There might be more snow this year. Here's why."
or
"Turkey dinners will be handed out next week. Here's what you need to know."
WTAF with all the "Here's" tags? Constant. Everywhere. Such obvious trend-speak that adds nothing and has a cloying, head-patting quality to it that distracts me every time. Gee, I would not have known that reading an article about something might include information about that thing! HERE it is at last!
Lop off that stupid and unnecessary tag.
End rant.
Hear! Hear!
Here! Here!
Um, check this out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear)
I was not attempting to police grammar. Here's why:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke
:)
Post by: Dave1442397 on November 17, 2021, 05:42:15 PM
Alright, I am cranky.
I have just seen another headline that says something like: "There might be more snow this year. Here's why."
or
"Turkey dinners will be handed out next week. Here's what you need to know."
WTAF with all the "Here's" tags? Constant. Everywhere. Such obvious trend-speak that adds nothing and has a cloying, head-patting quality to it that distracts me every time. Gee, I would not have known that reading an article about something might include information about that thing! HERE it is at last!
Lop off that stupid and unnecessary tag.
End rant.
Hear! Hear!
Here! Here!
Um, check this out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear)
I really would have liked to send that link to a company CEO who sent a message to our management complimenting them on a data conversion. He had "Here, here!" right at the top of the email...
Post by: Metalcat on November 17, 2021, 06:36:32 PM
Alright, I am cranky.
I have just seen another headline that says something like: "There might be more snow this year. Here's why."
or
"Turkey dinners will be handed out next week. Here's what you need to know."
WTAF with all the "Here's" tags? Constant. Everywhere. Such obvious trend-speak that adds nothing and has a cloying, head-patting quality to it that distracts me every time. Gee, I would not have known that reading an article about something might include information about that thing! HERE it is at last!
Lop off that stupid and unnecessary tag.
End rant.
Hear! Hear!
Here! Here!
Um, check this out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear)
I was not attempting to police grammar. Here's why:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke
:)
I got your joke ;)
Post by: Dancin'Dog on November 18, 2021, 06:36:18 AM
Post by: teen persuasion on November 18, 2021, 09:34:14 AM
Yep, I hate it, too."It needs fixed". A co-worker uses this phrase all the time, and I want to yell "No! It needs to be fixed!".
Is it a midwestern thing? The people I've come across who say it that way have all been from Chicago or Wichita. They also say "acrost" instead of across.
I have always hated that, too. I do believe it's a Midwestern thing. I've heard it all my life.
But I've only run across it in the last 5 years or so. Probably mostly online.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 18, 2021, 06:45:49 PM
Yep, I hate it, too."It needs fixed". A co-worker uses this phrase all the time, and I want to yell "No! It needs to be fixed!".
Is it a midwestern thing? The people I've come across who say it that way have all been from Chicago or Wichita. They also say "acrost" instead of across.
I have always hated that, too. I do believe it's a Midwestern thing. I've heard it all my life.
But I've only run across it in the last 5 years or so. Probably mostly online.
I've heard "It needs fixing" but I've never heard "It needs fixed". American Midwest then because my parents both grew up on the Prairies and they never ever said that.
Post by: sui generis on November 18, 2021, 06:51:31 PM
Post by: OtherJen on November 19, 2021, 10:32:01 AM
Yep, I hate it, too."It needs fixed". A co-worker uses this phrase all the time, and I want to yell "No! It needs to be fixed!".
Is it a midwestern thing? The people I've come across who say it that way have all been from Chicago or Wichita. They also say "acrost" instead of across.
I have always hated that, too. I do believe it's a Midwestern thing. I've heard it all my life.
But I've only run across it in the last 5 years or so. Probably mostly online.
I've heard "It needs fixing" but I've never heard "It needs fixed". American Midwest then because my parents both grew up on the Prairies and they never ever said that.
SE Michigan native. I've never heard "It needs fixed."
My recent pet peeve: "#boymom" all over social media posts. I first noticed this a couple of years ago, and now it seems to be EVERYwhere. I don't think I've ever seen "#girlmom," but I think I'd be just as annoyed by that. We already hyper-genderize kids with clothing, toys, and expectations of emotional and physical behavior. Why do we have to extend that to parenting?
Post by: BlueHouse on November 19, 2021, 02:34:04 PM
Yep, I hate it, too."It needs fixed". A co-worker uses this phrase all the time, and I want to yell "No! It needs to be fixed!".
Is it a midwestern thing? The people I've come across who say it that way have all been from Chicago or Wichita. They also say "acrost" instead of across.
I have always hated that, too. I do believe it's a Midwestern thing. I've heard it all my life.
But I've only run across it in the last 5 years or so. Probably mostly online.
I've heard "It needs fixing" but I've never heard "It needs fixed". American Midwest then because my parents both grew up on the Prairies and they never ever said that.
This is very common in the south.
Post by: Dancin'Dog on November 19, 2021, 03:57:07 PM
Yep, I hate it, too."It needs fixed". A co-worker uses this phrase all the time, and I want to yell "No! It needs to be fixed!".
Is it a midwestern thing? The people I've come across who say it that way have all been from Chicago or Wichita. They also say "acrost" instead of across.
I have always hated that, too. I do believe it's a Midwestern thing. I've heard it all my life.
But I've only run across it in the last 5 years or so. Probably mostly online.
I've heard "It needs fixing" but I've never heard "It needs fixed". American Midwest then because my parents both grew up on the Prairies and they never ever said that.
This is very common in the south.
Maybe in some areas of the South. I've never noticed hearing it in NC, where I've lived for most of my life.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 23, 2021, 10:07:27 AM
"I wretched" when the meaning was "I retched". Wretched and retched don't even sound the same when used properly.
Post by: Morning Glory on November 23, 2021, 10:27:52 AM
Found a new one.
"I wretched" when the meaning was "I retched". Wretched and retched don't even sound the same when used properly.
Tbf, a person who just retched might feel wretched.
I saw tortuous and torturous mixed up a lot when I worked in endoscopy, but having a tortuous colon is can make for a torturous experience.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 23, 2021, 11:35:53 AM
Found a new one.
"I wretched" when the meaning was "I retched". Wretched and retched don't even sound the same when used properly.
Tbf, a person who just retched might feel wretched.
I saw tortuous and torturous mixed up a lot when I worked in endoscopy, but having a tortuous colon is can make for a torturous experience.
I'm sure someone who just wretched would feel wretched, but only retched is a verb.
Tortuous and torturous, that's a fun pair.
Post by: nereo on November 23, 2021, 05:12:36 PM
Post by: GreenSheep on November 23, 2021, 05:21:39 PM
Part of my work puts me on boats, and I chuckle every time someone says “wench” instead of “winch”.
"To the winch, wench!" I really should watch "The Princess Bride" again sometime soon. So many great lines from that movie.
Post by: GreenSheep on November 24, 2021, 05:30:29 AM
(Nothing against KitchenAid mixers. I have my mom's 40 year old one, and while it still works and has provided lots of good meals and happiness, if I were to sell it today, I wouldn't get nearly the same return as I would if the same money had been used to purchase index funds!)
Post by: merula on November 29, 2021, 06:55:29 AM
I'm sure someone who just wretched would feel wretched, but only retched is a verb.
Tortuous and torturous, that's a fun pair.
Add in tortious for even more fun.
Post by: nereo on November 29, 2021, 08:13:31 AM
"It's an investment" as a way of justifying something expensive like a kitchen appliance. I think people get confused about true investing when both a KitchenAid mixer and a stock portfolio are "investments."
Never to be outdone, the realtors of the world are quick to parrot: "your home is likely the biggest investment you will ever make".
Most of the time your home is a liability, not an asset. And it's a pretty poor investment overall.
Post by: GuitarStv on November 29, 2021, 08:30:50 AM
"It's an investment" as a way of justifying something expensive like a kitchen appliance. I think people get confused about true investing when both a KitchenAid mixer and a stock portfolio are "investments."
Never to be outdone, the realtors of the world are quick to parrot: "your home is likely the biggest investment you will ever make".
Most of the time your home is a liability, not an asset. And it's a pretty poor investment overall.
A mortgage is a liability. A home is an asset.
While the home itself can certainly be considered a poor investment, the land that it's built on (assuming you're in a prosperous city) is often a pretty decent one.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 29, 2021, 10:02:04 AM
I'm sure someone who just wretched would feel wretched, but only retched is a verb.
Tortuous and torturous, that's a fun pair.
Add in tortious for even more fun.
Had to google that one, but it makes sense in legalese. ;-)
Post by: Chaplin on November 29, 2021, 10:18:03 AM
I'd like to see it go away, but I'm under no illusions about the odds of that.
Post by: nereo on November 29, 2021, 11:17:39 AM
"It's an investment" as a way of justifying something expensive like a kitchen appliance. I think people get confused about true investing when both a KitchenAid mixer and a stock portfolio are "investments."
Never to be outdone, the realtors of the world are quick to parrot: "your home is likely the biggest investment you will ever make".
Most of the time your home is a liability, not an asset. And it's a pretty poor investment overall.
A mortgage is a liability. A home is an asset.
While the home itself can certainly be considered a poor investment, the land that it's built on (assuming you're in a prosperous city) is often a pretty decent one.
I agree a mortgage is a liability, but the hone is both an asset and a liability. It typically comes with a hefty and inescapable tax burden, and there’s a sizable amount of maintenance involved.
The value of land is far from certain. Cities wax and wane, and their property values follow suit.
Post by: Morning Glory on November 29, 2021, 01:21:58 PM
I see modest primary homes as an investment that pays a tax free dividend in the form of imputed rent value. E.g. if the tax and maintenance is 500 but renting an equivalent place would be 1500, then your house investment is giving you 1000 every month, whether it increases in value or not."It's an investment" as a way of justifying something expensive like a kitchen appliance. I think people get confused about true investing when both a KitchenAid mixer and a stock portfolio are "investments."
Never to be outdone, the realtors of the world are quick to parrot: "your home is likely the biggest investment you will ever make".
Most of the time your home is a liability, not an asset. And it's a pretty poor investment overall.
A mortgage is a liability. A home is an asset.
While the home itself can certainly be considered a poor investment, the land that it's built on (assuming you're in a prosperous city) is often a pretty decent one.
I agree a mortgage is a liability, but the hone is both an asset and a liability. It typically comes with a hefty and inescapable tax burden, and there’s a sizable amount of maintenance involved.
The value of land is far from certain. Cities wax and wane, and their property values follow suit.
Post by: Morning Glory on November 29, 2021, 03:24:01 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/29/nurdles-plastic-pellets-environmental-ocean-spills-toxic-waste-not-classified-hazardous
Post by: slackmax on December 09, 2021, 04:16:33 PM
I started seeing the word "based" appear in places it didn't make sense. It was frequent enough that I consulted the Urban Dictionary to find that it's being used to indicated that someone is speaking an authentic truth, sort of like "grounded", and also as the opposite of biased.
I'd like to see it go away, but I'm under no illusions about the odds of that.
'Based' has been around for years. It's a cultural thing. As in "Jorgen grew up in the poor section of Balaka, where the Balakan music style began, therefore Jorgen is a 'based' performer of Balakan music. " As in his genius is based in his real geographical location. As opposed to someone who mimics the style.
For some reason, it doesn't annoy me too much.
Post by: Paul der Krake on December 10, 2021, 01:16:04 AM
I started seeing the word "based" appear in places it didn't make sense. It was frequent enough that I consulted the Urban Dictionary to find that it's being used to indicated that someone is speaking an authentic truth, sort of like "grounded", and also as the opposite of biased.That's just an internet culture thing, like "pwned" used to be.
I'd like to see it go away, but I'm under no illusions about the odds of that.
Post by: GreenSheep on December 10, 2021, 03:30:57 PM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on December 10, 2021, 03:42:50 PM
This isn't a specific word or phrase, but it makes me sad to hear/see people talk about how "busy" and "stressful" the holiday season is. It's like it's just accepted that this time of year is terribly stressful. I don't see where the stress comes from. Is it having to see family members you don't like? Is it having to buy gifts that you don't want to buy? Is it having too many people in your life who love you enough to invite you to their Christmas party? All of these things seem avoidable and/or manageable. If you don't like it, change it! I love this time of year, and I don't find it at all stressful. It seems that people bring the stress on themselves and feel proud of it, almost like the way being "so busy" is a badge of honor these days. Sad.I agree that "busy" and "stressed" are overused.
That said, I can point out a few reasons why the month between Thanksgiving and Christmas is more stressful than normal, at least for our family. We're already pretty darn busy in the base case, but a bunch of extra stuff comes up in those four weeks. Kids have band/choir/orchestra concerts, with the attendant extra rehearsals. I sing with a barbershop chorus, which has its own rehearsals and performances. Shopping for Christmas presents takes time. Baking and delivering cookies takes time. All manner of Christmas (or other holiday) parties happen. Everyone and their dog starts some sort of charitable giving project. I somehow found myself constructing a manger for a nativity scene. Oh, and it's now cold enough that DW has to drive kids to school instead of them riding their bikes. BTW, next week, so-and-so is going to be on vacation, would you be willing to cover for them? Now, add on all the year-end stuff and we're-about-to-start-a-new-year stuff and final exams in school and so forth, and it gets pretty nuts.
Basically, it went from "busy but manageable" to "holy cow what did we get ourselves into?!"
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 10, 2021, 05:10:11 PM
So I suppose it is up to us to manage to have more eustress than distress. In other words, put our financial analytical skills to figuring out ways to make the holidays fun without being totally exhausting.
And yeah, good luck, with that, I know.
Post by: Metalcat on December 10, 2021, 05:14:26 PM
Well there is bad stress = distress and good stress = "eustress". Planning a funeral is bad and stressful, planning a wedding is good and stressful. Eustress is also stress that encourages us to be productive and useful.
So I suppose it is up to us to manage to have more eustress than distress. In other words, put our financial analytical skills to figuring out ways to make the holidays fun without being totally exhausting.
And yeah, good luck, with that, I know.
Often planning a wedding is distress, weddings can suck donkey balls
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 10, 2021, 06:00:13 PM
Well there is bad stress = distress and good stress = "eustress". Planning a funeral is bad and stressful, planning a wedding is good and stressful. Eustress is also stress that encourages us to be productive and useful.
So I suppose it is up to us to manage to have more eustress than distress. In other words, put our financial analytical skills to figuring out ways to make the holidays fun without being totally exhausting.
And yeah, good luck, with that, I know.
Often planning a wedding is distress, weddings can suck donkey balls
True, l was being optimistic. Planning a fun vacation? Stressful but good.
I found a great way to make Christmas less stressful. I admit divorce may not be for everyone. ;-)
Post by: Metalcat on December 10, 2021, 06:06:47 PM
Well there is bad stress = distress and good stress = "eustress". Planning a funeral is bad and stressful, planning a wedding is good and stressful. Eustress is also stress that encourages us to be productive and useful.
So I suppose it is up to us to manage to have more eustress than distress. In other words, put our financial analytical skills to figuring out ways to make the holidays fun without being totally exhausting.
And yeah, good luck, with that, I know.
Often planning a wedding is distress, weddings can suck donkey balls
True, l was being optimistic. Planning a fun vacation? Stressful but good.
I found a great way to make Christmas less stressful. I admit divorce may not be for everyone. ;-)
HA!
Awesome
Post by: BlueHouse on December 10, 2021, 07:07:44 PM
I don't see where the stress comes from. Is it having to see family members you don't like?For me, it's not that I don't like my family members, it's the expectations that some of them have. It seems they have these memories of "the perfect Christmas from long ago" that they're constantly trying to recreate. Not only do I have no memory of a perfect holiday, trying to recreate something seems to lead to disappointment. That's what stresses me out.
We actually have a saying in our family (one of the only traditions that happens regularly). "It's not really Christmas until Mom cries". And then we all wipe our tears and laugh.
Post by: sui generis on December 14, 2021, 07:05:01 AM
I do think "bold-faced" is an accident that just coincidentally has a meaning consistent with historic origins, as the link suggests, but regardless I guess it's not really *wrong*. I do still wish it would go away though, since I'm sort of against mistakes being justified as correct through a backdoor. Feels a lot like the ends justifying the means.
Post by: JoePublic3.14 on December 15, 2021, 08:00:46 AM
"It needs fixed". A co-worker uses this phrase all the time, and I want to yell "No! It needs to be fixed!".
Is it a midwestern thing? The people I've come across who say it that way have all been from Chicago or Wichita. They also say "acrost" instead of across.
So there I was, just happily plodding along with my work today. Need to refresh some shared slides. I like to add a text box that can be deleted after review/updates are made to help me track what still need to be done.
Did the first pass review and added a text box to every slide with content. Scrolled back to slide 1 and stared at the text I had typed, and felt a little twitch as I read “Needs updated”. Why does that look weird…..oh I know! Fortunately, this presentation will only be worked on by me, and the only person who may look at it would not see anything questionable. He would say if questioned “I seen that box, so?”
Yes, in the midwest.
Post by: iris lily on December 15, 2021, 08:40:47 AM
This isn't a specific word or phrase, but it makes me sad to hear/see people talk about how "busy" and "stressful" the holiday season is. It's like it's just accepted that this time of year is terribly stressful. I don't see where the stress comes from. Is it having to see family members you don't like? Is it having to buy gifts that you don't want to buy? Is it having too many people in your life who love you enough to invite you to their Christmas party? All of these things seem avoidable and/or manageable. If you don't like it, change it! I love this time of year, and I don't find it at all stressful. It seems that people bring the stress on themselves and feel proud of it, almost like the way being "so busy" is a badge of honor these days. Sad.
Yes, stress and busyness this has been the Theme of the Season for years.
I hate the “Are you ready for Christmas?” question because I am kind of a literal person and I never know how to answer this. Hell yes I am ready, as I am ready for January 3, March 22, or whatever.
But I can assure everyone I do not want to hear your tedious ToDo shopping, baking, and travel preparation lists. Rather than This being THE MOST WONDERFUL TIME OF THE YEAR it is for me THE MOST BORING CONVERSATIONAL TIME OF THE YEAR.
Post by: GreenSheep on December 15, 2021, 09:59:03 AM
This isn't a specific word or phrase, but it makes me sad to hear/see people talk about how "busy" and "stressful" the holiday season is. It's like it's just accepted that this time of year is terribly stressful. I don't see where the stress comes from. Is it having to see family members you don't like? Is it having to buy gifts that you don't want to buy? Is it having too many people in your life who love you enough to invite you to their Christmas party? All of these things seem avoidable and/or manageable. If you don't like it, change it! I love this time of year, and I don't find it at all stressful. It seems that people bring the stress on themselves and feel proud of it, almost like the way being "so busy" is a badge of honor these days. Sad.
Yes, stress and busyness this has been the Theme of the Season for years.
I hate the “Are you ready for Christmas?” question because I am kind of a literal person and I never know how to answer this. Hell yes I am ready, as I am ready for January 3, March 22, or whatever.
But I can assure everyone I do not want to hear your tedious ToDo shopping, baking, and travel preparation lists. Rather than This being THE MOST WONDERFUL TIME OF THE YEAR it is for me THE MOST BORING CONVERSATIONAL TIME OF THE YEAR.
This is so true. It's bad enough that the answer to "How are you?" is often, "Oh, I'm SO busy!" all year. Now we have to hear that on steroids all the way until January. Is this just an American thing, or has it started to bleed into other countries/cultures, too? I mean, we just (in the US and Canada) finished celebrating Thanksgiving, and now we're turning right around and complaining about everything we just said we were grateful for... friends, family, food, activities, gifts, etc. I might have to start recommending to my complainy-pants acquaintances that they make "scale back on life so it's less stressful" one of their New Year's resolutions.
Post by: BlueMR2 on December 15, 2021, 05:16:27 PM
SE Michigan native. I've never heard "It needs fixed."NW OH I hear that all the time.
"Hit the ground running" is the current phrase I keep hearing that needs to go away. It's what people say when they are telling you they are unwilling to invest in any training, so are going to continue complaining about how nobody wants to work while searching for a Unicorn applicant that could only possibly satisfy all their requirements if they already worked for the company...
Post by: calimom on December 15, 2021, 08:31:36 PM
And if someone or something has put you through the 'ringer', do you mean to say 'wringer'? Or did they actually put you through the phone or doorbell ringer?
Post by: Louisville on December 16, 2021, 07:47:26 AM
When someone declares they are 'weary' of someone of something, does it mean they are actually 'wary'? It's one of those things that can go either way, but mostly seems to be the latter.Yeah, leery, weary, and wary are all crunched up together with some people.
And if someone or something has put you through the 'ringer', do you mean to say 'wringer'? Or did they actually put you through the phone or doorbell ringer?
Post by: GuitarStv on December 16, 2021, 08:01:02 AM
When someone declares they are 'weary' of someone of something, does it mean they are actually 'wary'? It's one of those things that can go either way, but mostly seems to be the latter.
There are a great many people at work who I'm weary of.
Post by: GreenSheep on December 21, 2021, 05:38:05 AM
Post by: RetiredAt63 on December 21, 2021, 06:49:34 AM
I've seen this in recipes recently: "Boil off the noodles." Meaning "cook the noodles in boiling water." Is that something people really say? To me "boil off" sounds like part of a chemistry lab procedure in which you're purifying something by boiling it so that part of it (water or whatever) evaporates.
To me that would mean boiling off all the water. As in the water is all gone. Boil the noodles means cook the noodles in boiling water. Just like simmer the noodles means cook the noodles in simmering (not boiling) water. Cooking, like anything else, has a vocabulary that indicates what you should be doing.
This isn't massive language precision, it is just being clear.
Post by: Metalcat on December 21, 2021, 07:05:27 AM
I've seen this in recipes recently: "Boil off the noodles." Meaning "cook the noodles in boiling water." Is that something people really say? To me "boil off" sounds like part of a chemistry lab procedure in which you're purifying something by boiling it so that part of it (water or whatever) evaporates.
Yeah, unless they mean to boil the water off completely and leave cooked noodles, which is done in some recipes, then they're using really weird wording.
Post by: nereo on December 22, 2021, 02:32:07 PM
This isn't a specific word or phrase, but it makes me sad to hear/see people talk about how "busy" and "stressful" the holiday season is. It's like it's just accepted that this time of year is terribly stressful. I don't see where the stress comes from. Is it having to see family members you don't like? Is it having to buy gifts that you don't want to buy? Is it having too many people in your life who love you enough to invite you to their Christmas party? All of these things seem avoidable and/or manageable. If you don't like it, change it! I love this time of year, and I don't find it at all stressful. It seems that people bring the stress on themselves and feel proud of it, almost like the way being "so busy" is a badge of honor these days. Sad.
Yes, stress and busyness this has been the Theme of the Season for years.
I hate the “Are you ready for Christmas?” question because I am kind of a literal person and I never know how to answer this. Hell yes I am ready, as I am ready for January 3, March 22, or whatever.
But I can assure everyone I do not want to hear your tedious ToDo shopping, baking, and travel preparation lists. Rather than This being THE MOST WONDERFUL TIME OF THE YEAR it is for me THE MOST BORING CONVERSATIONAL TIME OF THE YEAR.
This is so true. It's bad enough that the answer to "How are you?" is often, "Oh, I'm SO busy!" all year. Now we have to hear that on steroids all the way until January. Is this just an American thing, or has it started to bleed into other countries/cultures, too? I mean, we just (in the US and Canada) finished celebrating Thanksgiving, and now we're turning right around and complaining about everything we just said we were grateful for... friends, family, food, activities, gifts, etc. I might have to start recommending to my complainy-pants acquaintances that they make "scale back on life so it's less stressful" one of their New Year's resolutions.
One of my advisers, who was among the most successful, accomplished and kind people I have ever met, told me that “truly busy people rarely bother telling you how busy they are. The ones that do just want to be perceived as busy”.
Post by: Mrbeardedbigbucks on January 04, 2022, 04:26:03 PM
"You do you" - not sure where this one came from but I hear it all the time now.
"Protip" - everyone is a pro all of a sudden.
"Fun fact" - maybe in your head it's fun but most of the time it's just a fact, not that fun
Jeez, I sound like a real jerk after writing those. Fun Fact- I don't care. Pro tip- don't reply offering me a pro tip. I won't read it. You could reply and say, "you do you" and it might be appropriate here but I still can't stand it.
Post by: Chaplin on January 04, 2022, 04:59:20 PM
I haven't had time to sift through this extensive list of words/phrases I wish would go away so someone probably hit these already but I'll put them up anyway:
"You do you" - not sure where this one came from but I hear it all the time now.
"Protip" - everyone is a pro all of a sudden.
"Fun fact" - maybe in your head it's fun but most of the time it's just a fact, not that fun
Jeez, I sound like a real jerk after writing those. Fun Fact- I don't care. Pro tip- don't reply offering me a pro tip. I won't read it. You could reply and say, "you do you" and it might be appropriate here but I still can't stand it.
Whoa! So meta.
Except that FB has ruined "meta" so now it's a word or phrase that I regret must also go away. RIP "so meta."
Post by: merula on January 05, 2022, 11:40:35 AM
So the purpose they serve is to call attention to the sarcastic tone, particularly in writing.
Post by: Miss Piggy on January 05, 2022, 07:48:22 PM
Pro tip and fun fact are usually sarcastic in my experience. Like my BIL sent me "Fun fact: steel rusts" the other day, and I got a meme that was something like "Pro tip, if you hit your gas and brakes at the same time, your car will take a screenshot".
So the purpose they serve is to call attention to the sarcastic tone, particularly in writing.
Can I be friends with your BIL? This is totally my kind of humor.
Post by: Hall11235 on January 07, 2022, 08:31:16 AM
One of my advisers, who was among the most successful, accomplished and kind people I have ever met, told me that “truly busy people rarely bother telling you how busy they are. The ones that do just want to be perceived as busy”.
This is insane in how truthful it is. Now, off to tell my coworkers about how busy I am!
Post by: Frugal Lizard on January 07, 2022, 10:18:43 AM
teeheehee
One of my advisers, who was among the most successful, accomplished and kind people I have ever met, told me that “truly busy people rarely bother telling you how busy they are. The ones that do just want to be perceived as busy”.
This is insane in how truthful it is. Now, off to tell my coworkers about how busy I am!
Post by: slackmax on January 17, 2022, 01:13:47 PM
He or she 'said the quiet part out loud'. Means stating a controversial opinion that you meant (?) not to say' along with some other inoffensive stuff.
It was cute at first, but is now just annoying.
Post by: Dicey on January 17, 2022, 01:15:34 PM
Coworkers?
One of my advisers, who was among the most successful, accomplished and kind people I have ever met, told me that “truly busy people rarely bother telling you how busy they are. The ones that do just want to be perceived as busy”.
This is insane in how truthful it is. Now, off to tell my coworkers about how busy I am!
Post by: Miss Piggy on January 18, 2022, 07:43:48 PM
When I first heard this about 2 months ago, I liked it. But now it's everywhere and I am real tired of it.
He or she 'said the quiet part out loud'. Means stating a controversial opinion that you meant (?) not to say' along with some other inoffensive stuff.
It was cute at first, but is now just annoying.
How about "let's bring the background to the foreground"? Same meaning, just as annoying.
This reminds me of another recent annoying phrase: "Can I just call an audible here?" (I knew at one point the source of this one, which still didn't make it okay.)
Post by: Chaplin on January 19, 2022, 09:25:17 AM
Post by: Paul der Krake on January 19, 2022, 12:46:54 PM
Post by: Taran Wanderer on January 19, 2022, 06:13:14 PM
Post by: sui generis on January 24, 2022, 09:17:22 AM
Not a bad word generally. But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself". Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc. Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.
Why??
Post by: Kris on January 24, 2022, 09:50:49 AM
Myself.
Not a bad word generally. But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself". Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc. Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.
Why??
Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."
Post by: GreenSheep on January 24, 2022, 10:44:46 AM
Myself.
Not a bad word generally. But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself". Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc. Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.
Why??
Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."
I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."
"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!
Post by: Chaplin on January 24, 2022, 12:00:46 PM
Myself.
Not a bad word generally. But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself". Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc. Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.
Why??
Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."
I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."
"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!
Yes! Misuses of "myself" bug me, and utilize is completely useless (ulitizeless, utilityless?).
I saw "utilize" defined as "use something for which it's not intended," so I might utilize a wrench as a hammer, but I use a hammer to pound a nail. I have only seen this definition once, but I like it. It means that pretty much everyone utilizes the word utilize.
Post by: Morning Glory on January 24, 2022, 12:48:49 PM
They utilize leverage as a verb when it ought to be used as a noun.Myself.
Not a bad word generally. But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself". Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc. Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.
Why??
Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."
I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."
"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!
Yes! Misuses of "myself" bug me, and utilize is completely useless (ulitizeless, utilityless?).
I saw "utilize" defined as "use something for which it's not intended," so I might utilize a wrench as a hammer, but I use a hammer to pound a nail. I have only seen this definition once, but I like it. It means that pretty much everyone utilizes the word utilize.
I've seen "upper extremity" instead of arm before. Used to drive me nuts. It also can be abbreviated "UE". The plural is "UE's" because evidently that is easier than typing "arms". Smh.
Post by: Mr. Green on January 24, 2022, 10:50:59 PM
Just spit it out, man!
Post by: calimom on January 29, 2022, 02:14:18 PM
Myself.
Not a bad word generally. But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself". Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc. Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.
Why??
Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."
I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."
"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!
Misuse of the word "whom" belongs on this list.
"At the present time, Jo Anne was unable to utilize her upper extremity. Her sister, an individual whom is named Beth Anne, drove her vehicle over to be of assistance."
Post by: Kris on January 29, 2022, 03:09:29 PM
Myself.
Not a bad word generally. But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself". Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc. Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.
Why??
Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."
I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."
"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!
Misuse of the word "whom" belongs on this list.
"At the present time, Jo Anne was unable to utilize her upper extremity. Her sister, an individual whom is named Beth Anne, drove her vehicle over to be of assistance."
Oh, lord yes.
Post by: slackmax on January 30, 2022, 12:22:11 PM
"Thanks for listening to our commercial for Barfo products. To learn more, go to Barfo.com."
It was perfectly OK at first, but now every ******* radio commercial ends with "to learn more, go to ripmeoff.com". Just sick of it.
It's like the evening news. All the same.
Post by: Paul der Krake on January 30, 2022, 12:41:41 PM
Someone is doing (or not doing!) something I don't like, quick, speak up about the harm being done. It now reads like boilerplate language, stripped of any punch.
Post by: Paul der Krake on January 30, 2022, 12:47:11 PM
Nothing says "I'm totally out of my element and overcompensating" like people trying to use what they think is elaborate language. Succession (the TV series) did that brilliantly with Cousin Greg. Whenever he's in an uncomfortable situation he falls back to that. It reaches its most absurd when testifying in from of Congress ("Yes, If It Is To Be Said, So It Be, So It Is."), but it's sprinkled throughout the series.Myself.
Not a bad word generally. But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself". Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc. Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.
Why??
Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."
I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."
"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!
Misuse of the word "whom" belongs on this list.
"At the present time, Jo Anne was unable to utilize her upper extremity. Her sister, an individual whom is named Beth Anne, drove her vehicle over to be of assistance."
Oh, lord yes.
Post by: GreenSheep on January 30, 2022, 02:11:55 PM
I've started to notice the overuse of "harmful" and "harm" for everything.
Someone is doing (or not doing!) something I don't like, quick, speak up about the harm being done. It now reads like boilerplate language, stripped of any punch.
Same with "emergency" and "crisis." I can hardly use those words sarcastically anymore ("There was a crisis at the grocery store -- they were out of bananas! And now I'm having a breakfast emergency because what am I going to put on my oatmeal?!") because everyone uses them seriously for everything!
Post by: GreenSheep on May 13, 2022, 05:28:09 PM
Post by: NaN on May 13, 2022, 07:43:18 PM
Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.
Totally disagree. But sure. One can invest in themselves in ways that don't produce a direct return on that money by the standard % you might see on your account page. It might make them happy, give someone a hobby, etc. that might make them a more productive person down the road, which in turns makes a profit but it can never be recorded with a percentage return from a stock.
We do this all the time in society. Just the act of buying a car is an investment. Also, buying a computer to use email to engage with the workforce, etc. I can see how a fancy piece of clothing might make someone fit in with others, and does not make them stand out amongst other say employees (think stock traders etc who have fancy suits.). By fitting in they may make themselves not stand out to be the one cut, or it helps them fit in so they can get that promotion. Surely all these might produce 'profit' later on in life, but it is no always clear cut. I would agree that generally these are terrible investments that have a low chance of a return, but we would kid ourselves if we said they didn't ever make a difference/return.
Post by: Dicey on May 26, 2022, 08:33:58 AM
We'd still be kidding ourselves if we called them investments. In the last sentence, I would change "investments" to "expenditures".Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.
Totally disagree. But sure. One can invest in themselves in ways that don't produce a direct return on that money by the standard % you might see on your account page. It might make them happy, give someone a hobby, etc. that might make them a more productive person down the road, which in turns makes a profit but it can never be recorded with a percentage return from a stock.
We do this all the time in society. Just the act of buying a car is an investment. Also, buying a computer to use email to engage with the workforce, etc. I can see how a fancy piece of clothing might make someone fit in with others, and does not make them stand out amongst other say employees (think stock traders etc who have fancy suits.). By fitting in they may make themselves not stand out to be the one cut, or it helps them fit in so they can get that promotion. Surely all these might produce 'profit' later on in life, but it is no always clear cut. I would agree that generally these are terrible investments that have a low chance of a return, but we would kid ourselves if we said they didn't ever make a difference/return.
Post by: nereo on May 26, 2022, 08:51:12 AM
Post by: Tigerpine on May 26, 2022, 09:04:01 AM
Over the last decade I've noticed the word "investment" applied to anything and everything that people pay for, including insurance, expensive tools, home improvements and even vacations. Typically it seems like a marketing ploy to make people feel like they are making a smart decision by trading their money for "X".It is beyond doubt a marketing strategy, and I also find it less than amusing.
Similarly, I hate it when a company tells you "Congratulations!" after you make a purchase. I'm sure they do that to make you feel better about your choice, but I think that secretly the only real congratulations go to the salesperson who made the sale.
Post by: NaN on May 26, 2022, 09:10:21 AM
Nah, the definition opportunity costs can apply to both monetary investments and time/effort. If we split hairs on " investments" then we have to start that on all economic related vocabulary.We'd still be kidding ourselves if we called them investments. In the last sentence, I would change "investments" to "expenditures".Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.
Totally disagree. But sure. One can invest in themselves in ways that don't produce a direct return on that money by the standard % you might see on your account page. It might make them happy, give someone a hobby, etc. that might make them a more productive person down the road, which in turns makes a profit but it can never be recorded with a percentage return from a stock.
We do this all the time in society. Just the act of buying a car is an investment. Also, buying a computer to use email to engage with the workforce, etc. I can see how a fancy piece of clothing might make someone fit in with others, and does not make them stand out amongst other say employees (think stock traders etc who have fancy suits.). By fitting in they may make themselves not stand out to be the one cut, or it helps them fit in so they can get that promotion. Surely all these might produce 'profit' later on in life, but it is no always clear cut. I would agree that generally these are terrible investments that have a low chance of a return, but we would kid ourselves if we said they didn't ever make a difference/return.
Post by: NaN on May 26, 2022, 09:13:38 AM
Post by: nereo on May 26, 2022, 09:50:29 AM
Over the last decade I've noticed the word "investment" applied to anything and everything that people pay for, including insurance, expensive tools, home improvements and even vacations. Typically it seems like a marketing ploy to make people feel like they are making a smart decision by trading their money for "X".It is beyond doubt a marketing strategy, and I also find it less than amusing.
Similarly, I hate it when a company tells you "Congratulations!" after you make a purchase. I'm sure they do that to make you feel better about your choice, but I think that secretly the only real congratulations go to the salesperson who made the sale.
I was surprised and a little taken aback at the number of people who said "congratulations!" to us each time we've purchased a home.
I don't know why taking out a mortgage for a home is reason to congratulate someone. But it seems to be the de-facto response whenever someone learns we bought (and are not renting) our home.
Post by: NaN on May 26, 2022, 09:55:50 AM
Yes, that's a phrase I wish would go away. It would be pretty funny if the cashier at the grocery store started saying congratulations every time I checked out.Over the last decade I've noticed the word "investment" applied to anything and everything that people pay for, including insurance, expensive tools, home improvements and even vacations. Typically it seems like a marketing ploy to make people feel like they are making a smart decision by trading their money for "X".It is beyond doubt a marketing strategy, and I also find it less than amusing.
Similarly, I hate it when a company tells you "Congratulations!" after you make a purchase. I'm sure they do that to make you feel better about your choice, but I think that secretly the only real congratulations go to the salesperson who made the sale.
I was surprised and a little taken aback at the number of people who said "congratulations!" to us each time we've purchased a home.
I don't know why taking out a mortgage for a home is reason to congratulate someone. But it seems to be the de-facto response whenever someone learns we bought (and are not renting) our home.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on May 26, 2022, 10:13:52 AM
Over the last decade I've noticed the word "investment" applied to anything and everything that people pay for, including insurance, expensive tools, home improvements and even vacations. Typically it seems like a marketing ploy to make people feel like they are making a smart decision by trading their money for "X".It is beyond doubt a marketing strategy, and I also find it less than amusing.
Similarly, I hate it when a company tells you "Congratulations!" after you make a purchase. I'm sure they do that to make you feel better about your choice, but I think that secretly the only real congratulations go to the salesperson who made the sale.
I was surprised and a little taken aback at the number of people who said "congratulations!" to us each time we've purchased a home.
I don't know why taking out a mortgage for a home is reason to congratulate someone. But it seems to be the de-facto response whenever someone learns we bought (and are not renting) our home.
When you truly own your home (not sharing co-ownership with the bank) we will all say "Congratulations" to you. Because it may or may not be a rewarding financial investment, but it is an investment in so many other aspects of your lives. Right now any congratulation are just for saving up enough for a down payment. Hmm, actually that is something worth congratulating you for, you have managed to show the commitment to get that savings.
Hmm, some things are investments, in that in the long run they may make or save money. And I am firmly convinced that we need to compare apples to apples. If I garden and someone says my tomatoes cost $.xx each, my reaction is to say $.xx is the store price for ordinary tomatoes. What is the price for organic tomatoes, since my tomatoes are organic and I know exactly what was involved in their growing. Or if someone buys a freezer (an upfront cost) but over the next 10 years they save a bundle by freezing things bought on sale (i.e. produce at its peak, meat on sale, etc.) then it would be an investment. I invested in equipment for canning, because I just can't buy relish as yummy as the relish I make. I don't even care if I am saving money (I am), I care about the quality I can get by making my own.
However, coming back on topic, most congratulations seem to be for things that won't show that kind of return. Because they are fun or flashy or improve one's image, not because they are truly useful.
Post by: nereo on May 26, 2022, 01:34:36 PM
"de-risking".
As in: making something less risky for an individual or company.
Bleh.
Post by: RWD on May 26, 2022, 02:17:05 PM
Recently used in a journal publication I was involved with:
"de-risking".
As in: making something less risky for an individual or company.
Bleh.
What was wrong with the word "mitigation?" Haha
Post by: GuitarStv on May 26, 2022, 02:25:19 PM
My son yesterday was explaining to me that he was the hashtag one smartest kid in his class. It took me a while to figure out that he had just never heard someone refer to '#' as 'number'.
:S
Post by: Taran Wanderer on May 26, 2022, 04:58:11 PM
I'm getting tired of the word "hashtag".
My son yesterday was explaining to me that he was the hashtag one smartest kid in his class. It took me a while to figure out that he had just never heard someone refer to '#' as 'number'.
:S
#KidsTheseDays
Post by: zolotiyeruki on May 26, 2022, 05:02:24 PM
I believe mitigation is minimizing the effects, while making something less risky can mean either reducing the probability or mitigating the effects.Recently used in a journal publication I was involved with:
"de-risking".
As in: making something less risky for an individual or company.
Bleh.
What was wrong with the word "mitigation?" Haha
Post by: RWD on May 26, 2022, 05:06:22 PM
Ah, makes sense.I believe mitigation is minimizing the effects, while making something less risky can mean either reducing the probability or mitigating the effects.Recently used in a journal publication I was involved with:
"de-risking".
As in: making something less risky for an individual or company.
Bleh.
What was wrong with the word "mitigation?" Haha
Post by: Dicey on May 26, 2022, 06:09:24 PM
Huh. Isn't splitting hairs what we do here?Nah, the definition opportunity costs can apply to both monetary investments and time/effort. If we split hairs on " investments" then we have to start that on all economic related vocabulary.We'd still be kidding ourselves if we called them investments. In the last sentence, I would change "investments" to "expenditures".Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.
Totally disagree. But sure. One can invest in themselves in ways that don't produce a direct return on that money by the standard % you might see on your account page. It might make them happy, give someone a hobby, etc. that might make them a more productive person down the road, which in turns makes a profit but it can never be recorded with a percentage return from a stock.
We do this all the time in society. Just the act of buying a car is an investment. Also, buying a computer to use email to engage with the workforce, etc. I can see how a fancy piece of clothing might make someone fit in with others, and does not make them stand out amongst other say employees (think stock traders etc who have fancy suits.). By fitting in they may make themselves not stand out to be the one cut, or it helps them fit in so they can get that promotion. Surely all these might produce 'profit' later on in life, but it is no always clear cut. I would agree that generally these are terrible investments that have a low chance of a return, but we would kid ourselves if we said they didn't ever make a difference/return.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on May 26, 2022, 06:42:36 PM
Post by: GuitarStv on May 26, 2022, 06:54:52 PM
I'm getting tired of the word "hashtag".
My son yesterday was explaining to me that he was the hashtag one smartest kid in his class. It took me a while to figure out that he had just never heard someone refer to '#' as 'number'.
:S
#KidsTheseDays
hashbrown part of the problem, not the solution
Post by: G-dog on May 26, 2022, 07:07:16 PM
I'm getting tired of the word "hashtag".
My son yesterday was explaining to me that he was the hashtag one smartest kid in his class. It took me a while to figure out that he had just never heard someone refer to '#' as 'number'.
:S
Or pound #pound #number #tictactoe
Post by: merula on May 27, 2022, 09:00:00 AM
If you can't reduce the probability or mitigate the effects, you can also lessen your risk by buying insurance to cover that specific risk. Like buying earthquake insurance when you can't retrofit your building or change the probability of earthquakes. (Sorry, I work in insurance, we're hugely pedantic as a group and this is right up my alley.)I believe mitigation is minimizing the effects, while making something less risky can mean either reducing the probability or mitigating the effects.Recently used in a journal publication I was involved with:
"de-risking".
As in: making something less risky for an individual or company.
Bleh.
What was wrong with the word "mitigation?" Haha
Post by: Taran Wanderer on May 27, 2022, 12:16:23 PM
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTdWFrHxw/?k=1
Post by: nereo on May 27, 2022, 01:28:36 PM
Speaking of kids… apparently cash isn’t real money.
I kinda get that tough. I hate accepting cash and making change, don't like carrying it around, and by itself it doesn't really leave much of a trail proving what you spent, when and to whom. I've had a $5 bill in my wallet going on three months now - it just sits there occupying space.
Post by: NaN on May 27, 2022, 01:43:53 PM
Speaking of kids… apparently cash isn’t real money.
I kinda get that tough. I hate accepting cash and making change, don't like carrying it around, and by itself it doesn't really leave much of a trail proving what you spent, when and to whom. I've had a $5 bill in my wallet going on three months now - it just sits there occupying space.
Economies and currencies are all just made up anyway. Isn't that what the book Sapiens: A brief history of humankind taught us? The real teaching moment is telling them the balance in their account is also made up, too. Fractional banking lesson!
Post by: NaN on May 27, 2022, 01:45:33 PM
touchéHuh. Isn't splitting hairs what we do here?Nah, the definition opportunity costs can apply to both monetary investments and time/effort. If we split hairs on " investments" then we have to start that on all economic related vocabulary.We'd still be kidding ourselves if we called them investments. In the last sentence, I would change "investments" to "expenditures".Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.
Totally disagree. But sure. One can invest in themselves in ways that don't produce a direct return on that money by the standard % you might see on your account page. It might make them happy, give someone a hobby, etc. that might make them a more productive person down the road, which in turns makes a profit but it can never be recorded with a percentage return from a stock.
We do this all the time in society. Just the act of buying a car is an investment. Also, buying a computer to use email to engage with the workforce, etc. I can see how a fancy piece of clothing might make someone fit in with others, and does not make them stand out amongst other say employees (think stock traders etc who have fancy suits.). By fitting in they may make themselves not stand out to be the one cut, or it helps them fit in so they can get that promotion. Surely all these might produce 'profit' later on in life, but it is no always clear cut. I would agree that generally these are terrible investments that have a low chance of a return, but we would kid ourselves if we said they didn't ever make a difference/return.
Post by: LD_TAndK on June 24, 2022, 06:31:06 PM
Also trying to find out more about the phrase, googling stuff like "Here's why etymology" or "Here's why sucks" and you just get more "here's why" articles. ARGHH
Post by: Dicey on June 25, 2022, 08:45:17 AM
Has "Here's why" come up in this thread? Specifically at the end of a headline like "Stocks surge even though consumers feel lousy. Here's why". It's driving me nuts.This sounds like shorthand for someone screaming, "LISTEN TO ME, BECAUSE I'M RIGHT!"
Also trying to find out more about the phrase, googling stuff like "Here's why etymology" or "Here's why sucks" and you just get more "here's why" articles. ARGHH
Post by: Tyson on June 25, 2022, 02:15:04 PM
Has "Here's why" come up in this thread? Specifically at the end of a headline like "Stocks surge even though consumers feel lousy. Here's why". It's driving me nuts.
Also trying to find out more about the phrase, googling stuff like "Here's why etymology" or "Here's why sucks" and you just get more "here's why" articles. ARGHH
I disagree with you. Here's why.
Haha, sorry I couldn't resist :)
Post by: RWD on June 26, 2022, 01:55:23 PM
I'm so sick of seeing stuff like "<expert> breaks down <scenes involving their field in movies or whatever>" when the content is more accurately "casually talks about."
Post by: slackmax on June 28, 2022, 07:08:02 AM
Example:
'The assailant gave over their weapon to police'.
Are we not allowed to know the gender of the assailant?
And, of course, 'assailant' is singular, and 'their' is plural, which is incorrect.
Post by: sui generis on June 28, 2022, 08:57:25 AM
I hear this on TV a lot. Ungendering, on purpose, and making the sentence awkward and weird.
Example:
'The assailant gave over their weapon to police'.
Are we not allowed to know the gender of the assailant?
And, of course, 'assailant' is singular, and 'their' is plural, which is incorrect.
But their isn't (strictly) plural. It's always been perfectly acceptable to use if you honestly don't *know* someone's gender, so why not be able to use it if you just aren't sure or believe it's one thing but haven't been able to ask them their pronouns? (<---Ah, I just did it myself! And really, what else would I say there? "...haven't been able to ask him or her his or her pronouns?" Much more awkward IMO than using "they" in the singular and also falsely assumes only two genders.) I would much prefer someone using "they" and "their", etc. in the singular than making an erroneous and possibly offensive assumption about gender, in the absence of knowledge.
Post by: merula on June 28, 2022, 09:05:56 AM
I hear this on TV a lot. Ungendering, on purpose, and making the sentence awkward and weird.
Example:
'The assailant gave over their weapon to police'.
Are we not allowed to know the gender of the assailant?
And, of course, 'assailant' is singular, and 'their' is plural, which is incorrect.
The singular they dates back hundreds of years in English. Shakespeare used it. It's the most common way of referring to an unknown person. No one actually says "Who left his or her scooter in the middle of this sidewalk?" outside of the English teachers of my childhood.
Post by: Josiecat22222 on June 28, 2022, 07:58:32 PM
I resent that railing against the popular vernacular of my teenage son makes me feel OLD. But I truly hate these words.
Post by: Davnasty on June 28, 2022, 08:24:07 PM
My words that I wish would go away: "vibing" or things are a "vibe". Also "bussing" which means "very very cool".
I resent that railing against the popular vernacular of my teenage son makes me feel OLD. But I truly hate these words.
This has nothing to do with being old. Your feelings about these words are objectively correct.
Post by: Metalcat on June 29, 2022, 04:07:33 AM
My words that I wish would go away: "vibing" or things are a "vibe". Also "bussing" which means "very very cool".
I resent that railing against the popular vernacular of my teenage son makes me feel OLD. But I truly hate these words.
This has nothing to do with being old. Your feelings about these words are objectively correct.
How so? Teens always have their own slang and their parents' generation always think it's ridiculous/offensive.
I can't remember how many times I was told as a teen that it was wrong that I used "wicked" to mean cool.
ETA: also, "bussin" is yet another example of an AAVE word that has been around for many decades, but has only recently made it into white-youth popular vernacular. Evidently it's been a term used for excellent food for a very long time and over the past decade or so has evolved to be applied to very good things in general.
But it's the kind of word that people from your grand parents generation would likely have used, if they were black and American.
There is currently debate though if the current mainstream use of applying it to things other than food is cultural appropriation and misuse. But that's getting too into the weeds where it's not appropriate for me, a white person who is not an expert in this particular area of linguistics, to comment any further.
Post by: slackmax on June 29, 2022, 07:13:03 AM
Other words bug me, but vibe is OK in my book, lol.
Malcat, I had to look up AAVE. Thank you.
Post by: Metalcat on June 29, 2022, 08:46:49 AM
I'm OK with "vibe", as in the 'ethereal mood vibration' of an event or person. Similar to 'she and I are on the same wavelength'.
Other words bug me, but vibe is OK in my book, lol.
Malcat, I had to look up AAVE. Thank you.
I am a linguistics nerd, so I forget that people don't automatically know what that means. We have gotten heated in this particular thread before with people labeling AAVE constructs as "bad grammar" instead of understanding it to be a legitimate dialect of English. The same way it's not an error for a British person who speaks BrE to refer to a piece of cake after dinner as "pudding" or for them to drop articles like saying "I was in hospital" as opposed to "I was in the hospital." We're just used to certain *white* dialects being considered "correct" while POC dialects are considered "grammatically incorrect."
Then when things are pulled from POC dialect or another minority culture into pop culture, which often happens to AAVE through popular music and then disseminated through social media, it's seen as some kind of young-people foolishness, when it's really something that people have been saying for generations. A lot of the people who have said "bussin" in their lifetime probably thought using the word "Google" as a verb was pretty ridiculous.
It's always a good idea to track the etymology of popular phrases, not only to understand where new ones come from, but also to understand why so many of the widely accepted ones are actually rooted in deeply offensive origins.
So ironically, a lot of the words and phrases we are totally comfortable with, we really shouldn't be, and a lot of the things we perceive as "new" are often very old.
There's a lot of history behind why we say what we say, and like most history, it's largely quite ugly.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 29, 2022, 08:53:43 AM
Post by: RWD on June 29, 2022, 09:24:26 AM
Post by: Metalcat on June 29, 2022, 09:30:57 AM
AAVE is bad grammar. Giving examples of bad grammar that English people use doesn't make AAVE any more valid.
You really believe that BrE is "bad grammar?" Seriously? Their English structure predates ours. "I was in hospital" is not bad grammar, it is a different dialect of English.
Actually, no, I'm not going to have this fight again.
Man, I was kind of excited to come back to full participation in the forums, but you're making me question that choice.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 29, 2022, 10:00:22 AM
AAVE is bad grammar. Giving examples of bad grammar that English people use doesn't make AAVE any more valid.
You really believe that BrE is "bad grammar?" Seriously? Their English structure predates ours. "I was in hospital" is not bad grammar, it is a different dialect of English.
Actually, no, I'm not going to have this fight again.
Man, I was kind of excited to come back to full participation in the forums, but you're making me question that choice.
Yesterday, when my 8 year old son proudly said "Sup brah!" to his 80 year old Chinese grandmother . . . we just corrected his mistake. We don't lecture the grandmother about how he's really in the right and speaking AAVE.
Different dialects are fun, and provide colour to the language of English. Great for use in poetry, creative writing, music, etc. Dialects often use bad grammar and slang words though. If you wouldn't teach it to an immigrant learning to speak the language in a classroom, then it's probably incorrect grammar.
I don't always agree with you, but am happy to see you back!
Post by: slackmax on June 29, 2022, 11:49:27 AM
AAVE is bad grammar. Giving examples of bad grammar that English people use doesn't make AAVE any more valid.
You really believe that BrE is "bad grammar?" Seriously? Their English structure predates ours. "I was in hospital" is not bad grammar, it is a different dialect of English.
Actually, no, I'm not going to have this fight again.
Man, I was kind of excited to come back to full participation in the forums, but you're making me question that choice.
Not taking a side, here, Malcat, but I look forward to reading your posts here all over MMM. Chin up!
Post by: Josiecat22222 on June 29, 2022, 11:53:59 AM
AAVE is bad grammar. Giving examples of bad grammar that English people use doesn't make AAVE any more valid.
You really believe that BrE is "bad grammar?" Seriously? Their English structure predates ours. "I was in hospital" is not bad grammar, it is a different dialect of English.
Actually, no, I'm not going to have this fight again.
Man, I was kind of excited to come back to full participation in the forums, but you're making me question that choice.
Yesterday, when my 8 year old son proudly said "Sup brah!" to his 80 year old Chinese grandmother . . . we just corrected his mistake. We don't lecture the grandmother about how he's really in the right and speaking AAVE.
Different dialects are fun, and provide colour to the language of English. Great for use in poetry, creative writing, music, etc. Dialects often use bad grammar and slang words though. If you wouldn't teach it to an immigrant learning to speak the language in a classroom, then it's probably incorrect grammar.
I don't always agree with you, but am happy to see you back!
This is truly a sticky situation. While AAVE has its own grammatical rules, structure and vocabulary, the interface with "standard" English (for lack of a better term) is fraught with difficulty. If "sup bruh" or "bussin" is utilized by a paler complected individual such as myself, is that incorporating AAVE into the broader worldview (which is lauded) or is it "cultural appropriation" and likely to result in being ostracized or "cancelled"?? Couple that with phrases such as "sup bruh" or "bussin" are often pronounced with a "blaccent" and the temperature gets turned up still more. These are not easy questions and the difficulty of honoring/accepting vocabulary from a broader population brings with it concerns of being perceived to do the opposite.
Post by: marble_faun on June 29, 2022, 12:42:01 PM
It did raise some issues in my mind - according to the people who have strong opinions on these matters, was it cultural "erasure" to change those sentences? or would my two-year-old be engaged in "cultural appropriation" by using AAVE phrases?
Ultimately I did decide it was "incorrect English... for us, a white family."
I had similar thoughts coming across a black person online whose preferred pronouns were "dey/dem." It's like a riddle: Do I respect the person's stated pronouns, even though as a white person I'd sound pretty weird calling someone "dey"? I think in that case I would roll with they/them.
Post by: merula on June 29, 2022, 01:40:24 PM
Following the rules of a dialectal grammar is not "bad grammar". People who speak AAVE still made mistakes that were outside of AAVE grammar rules when they were learning to speak, like kids who say "He breaked my toy". So there's the possibility of bad grammar within any dialect (I don't know of any where "breaked" is correct), but being non-standard is not automatically "bad grammar".
For a super white example, in Minnesota "go with" and "come with" are verb forms on their own that do not require the addition of a noun. This is because of Germanic/Scandinavian influences with equivalent verb forms (mitkommen and mitgehen in German, I don't speak any Scandinavian languages but I've been assured it's similar). So "Do you want to come with?" is grammatical in the Minnesota dialect (the me/us is implied), but it's not standard English, which requires a noun to complete the prepositional phrase.
It can, however, be inappropriate for a given situation, as can many other things we would agree are perfectly grammatical. It would be inappropriate for a medical pamphlet in the US to say "While you are in hospital", just as it would be inappropriate for a medical pamphlet in the UK to say "While you are in the hospital". It may or may not be appropriate to repeat AAVE depending on the situations. (A book where a Black American character is speaking it? Probably OK representation. A book that seems to be randomly in AAVE read aloud by a white person? That's weird.)
If you come to Minnesota to visit me, and I say "I'm planning to go up Nort for the opener, do you want to come with?" and you say I'm using bad grammar, you've fundamentally misunderstood how dialects work. And you're a jerk.
Post by: sui generis on June 29, 2022, 01:53:24 PM
Malcat, I really appreciate your contributions to the forum and hope you stick around.
Following the rules of a dialectal grammar is not "bad grammar". People who speak AAVE still made mistakes that were outside of AAVE grammar rules when they were learning to speak, like kids who say "He breaked my toy". So there's the possibility of bad grammar within any dialect (I don't know of any where "breaked" is correct), but being non-standard is not automatically "bad grammar".
For a super white example, in Minnesota "go with" and "come with" are verb forms on their own that do not require the addition of a noun. This is because of Germanic/Scandinavian influences with equivalent verb forms (mitkommen and mitgehen in German, I don't speak any Scandinavian languages but I've been assured it's similar). So "Do you want to come with?" is grammatical in the Minnesota dialect (the me/us is implied), but it's not standard English, which requires a noun to complete the prepositional phrase.
It can, however, be inappropriate for a given situation, as can many other things we would agree are perfectly grammatical. It would be inappropriate for a medical pamphlet in the US to say "While you are in hospital", just as it would be inappropriate for a medical pamphlet in the UK to say "While you are in the hospital". It may or may not be appropriate to repeat AAVE depending on the situations. (A book where a Black American character is speaking it? Probably OK representation. A book that seems to be randomly in AAVE read aloud by a white person? That's weird.)
If you come to Minnesota to visit me, and I say "I'm planning to go up Nort for the opener, do you want to come with?" and you say I'm using bad grammar, you've fundamentally misunderstood how dialects work. And you're a jerk.
I've never even been to Minnesota and I use "come with" all the time! To the extent it's a specific dialect vs. standard English, I have no idea. But it does make me wonder how many dialects of English I cycle between in an average day.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 29, 2022, 02:31:20 PM
I also worked with many students whose first language was French. Their English was fine but they often used sentence structures that were grammatically correct but a bit odd, because they were actually using French structures.
And of course we all have dialects. I had to really think about what I was saying when I first moved to Ontario, because I spoke Quebec English, a recognized dialect. And I know people in Ontario who use "youse" and it is standard for the area.
Post by: GuitarStv on June 29, 2022, 03:06:24 PM
And I know people in Ontario who use "youse" and it is standard for the area.
You go up into Nordern Ontaryo en every body speek lek dey rader use Francaise. :P
Post by: Metalcat on June 29, 2022, 03:29:05 PM
I was reading a children's book to my toddler that incorporated AAVE (I think as a means of being inclusive to black children who speak in AAVE), but as I read aloud, I changed those sentences to standard English. My child is a language sponge and probably would have begun using the AAVE phrases after hearing them repeatedly in the book.
It did raise some issues in my mind - according to the people who have strong opinions on these matters, was it cultural "erasure" to change those sentences? or would my two-year-old be engaged in "cultural appropriation" by using AAVE phrases?
Ultimately I did decide it was "incorrect English... for us, a white family."
I had similar thoughts coming across a black person online whose preferred pronouns were "dey/dem." It's like a riddle: Do I respect the person's stated pronouns, even though as a white person I'd sound pretty weird calling someone "dey"? I think in that case I would roll with they/them.
These are all cultural issues on which I hold no authority, I was only commenting on the fact that a dialect being different doesn't make it grammatically wrong.
This is basic linguistics, of which I hold a degree, so I can speak to the linguistics question.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on June 29, 2022, 05:07:10 PM
And I know people in Ontario who use "youse" and it is standard for the area.
You go up into Nordern Ontaryo en every body speek lek dey rader use Francaise. :P
Because if they weren't talking to you they would be. ;-)
Post by: marble_faun on June 29, 2022, 09:03:56 PM
Post by: Dicey on June 29, 2022, 11:57:14 PM
Post by: GuitarStv on June 30, 2022, 08:00:44 AM
I was only commenting on the fact that a dialect being different doesn't make it grammatically wrong.
This is basic linguistics, of which I hold a degree, so I can speak to the linguistics question.
Maybe this is where the disconnect is. A dialect that uses different grammar than standard English is grammatically wrong in reference to standard English, which has always sort of been my argument.
But sure . . . I suppose that dialects could be perfectly grammatically correct with whatever separate set of rules are used to define the dialect. Where are dialects defined and codified? And if they are defined/codified, does that mean that some people who speak them are speaking them wrong and should be corrected?
I've always thought of dialects as relatively unstable . . . given that they are not really taught in a systemized way, but learned and passed on by informal usage. So it makes sense that the rules governing them are in flux. 'Fleek', 'lit', 'bae', 'woke', 'cheugy' . . . a huge number of terms associated with and in regular use in AAVE today weren't in use in that context even thirty years ago. And a great many terms in common use in the 90's ('Fly', 'Wiggity Whack', 'Phat', 'Hittin' Skinz', 'Jiggy', 'Bling-bling') have almost completely fallen out of regular usage. Go back to the '70s and the differences become even more pronounced. If the rules are constantly and quickly changing, is it really valid to say that there is a defined set of grammar that's adhered to?
Post by: Metalcat on June 30, 2022, 08:45:04 AM
I was only commenting on the fact that a dialect being different doesn't make it grammatically wrong.
This is basic linguistics, of which I hold a degree, so I can speak to the linguistics question.
Maybe this is where the disconnect is. A dialect that uses different grammar than standard English is grammatically wrong in reference to standard English, which has always sort of been my argument.
But sure . . . I suppose that dialects could be perfectly grammatically correct with whatever separate set of rules are used to define the dialect. Where are dialects defined and codified? And if they are defined/codified, does that mean that some people who speak them are speaking them wrong and should be corrected?
I've always thought of dialects as relatively unstable . . . given that they are not really taught in a systemized way, but learned and passed on by informal usage. So it makes sense that the rules governing them are in flux. 'Fleek', 'lit', 'bae', 'woke', 'cheugy' . . . a huge number of terms associated with and in regular use in AAVE today weren't in use in that context even thirty years ago. And a great many terms in common use in the 90's ('Fly', 'Wiggity Whack', 'Phat', 'Hittin' Skinz', 'Jiggy', 'Bling-bling') have almost completely fallen out of regular usage. Go back to the '70s and the differences become even more pronounced. If the rules are constantly and quickly changing, is it really valid to say that there is a defined set of grammar that's adhered to?
Honestly dude, I'm so fucking fed up with having this conversation with people, I'm really not up to getting into it. I literally once called off a wedding over this exact argument, so I'm 1000% over it.
There are wonderful resources out there, and linguistics is a truly fascinating and incredibly complex topic, it's what got me into neuroscience in the first place.
Understanding why and how languages and dialects differ and the relative impacts of those differences is pretty interesting shit, I highly recommend it if you're bored and want to learn something new.
Post by: SpeedReader on July 13, 2022, 11:22:51 AM
Post by: dandarc on July 13, 2022, 11:31:52 AM
"Pregnant persons" and "X individual uses they/them pronouns". I don't care how people live their lives -- they can identify as triple-gendered space unicorns for all it matters to me -- but stop butchering the language. Please.Thanks for reminder to update the sig line - it is pretty damn important to make an effort on other people's pronouns.
Post by: Tyson on July 13, 2022, 11:45:23 AM
"Pregnant persons" and "X individual uses they/them pronouns". I don't care how people live their lives -- they can identify as triple-gendered space unicorns for all it matters to me -- but stop butchering the language. Please.
The good thing about language is that it's flexible and will adapt to changes like this pretty easily.
Post by: Kris on July 13, 2022, 01:53:44 PM
"Pregnant persons" and "X individual uses they/them pronouns". I don't care how people live their lives -- they can identify as triple-gendered space unicorns for all it matters to me -- but stop butchering the language. Please.Thanks for reminder to update the sig line - it is pretty damn important to make an effort on other people's pronouns.
Good point. Thanks for making it.
Post by: ATtiny85 on July 13, 2022, 06:32:05 PM
"Pregnant persons" and "X individual uses they/them pronouns". I don't care how people live their lives -- they can identify as triple-gendered space unicorns for all it matters to me -- but stop butchering the language. Please.
I do find interesting who tries to dictate things and how it is attempted to be dictated.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on July 13, 2022, 10:19:50 PM
Post by: Kris on July 14, 2022, 12:15:25 AM
In a world where women have been and still are often considered second class citizens, perhaps this use of language is necessary to help remind us that every person, wherever they fall on the gender or racial or other spectrum, should enjoy the same rights and freedoms as each white male property owner.
Indeed. If pregnant humans had always been called people, maybe we would give them rights based on their permanent, inalienable status as such, rather than taking them away based on their temporary status as pregnant second-class citizens trumping said rights.
Post by: Dicey on July 14, 2022, 01:23:17 AM
A loved one recommended this TED talk by someone we both know. I get it now. New badge ordered.
https://youtu.be/XguYZXUChhY
Post by: Metalcat on July 14, 2022, 03:58:49 AM
"Pregnant persons" and "X individual uses they/them pronouns". I don't care how people live their lives -- they can identify as triple-gendered space unicorns for all it matters to me -- but stop butchering the language. Please.
I do find interesting who tries to dictate things and how it is attempted to be dictated.
People try to dictate shit all the time. What ends up part of the language is usually what is agreed upon by the majority. English is a pretty democratic language because of how adaptable it is.
A change can't really be dictated, only adopted.
Post by: getsorted on July 15, 2022, 01:59:16 PM
There isn't a "standard English." There is formal English and there are formal written and spoken conventions. Even within formal English, the conventions of speaking and writing can vary significantly. For example, the use of passive voice may be required in one journal and banned in another.
There are different dialects with different grammatical conventions and they each have their own standards of correctness. I don't use "good English" or "bad English." It's much more useful to educate about formal and informal register.
Some of those dialects have prestige status and if you would like to gather some prestige status, learning those rules is one way to do it. Most of the rules that will cause someone to pick on you for breaking them don't actually affect intelligibility; they simply exist to show that you have been taught the rules.
What I find interesting (and sometimes distressing) about my work is that I work with people who are much more intelligent and educated than I am. Most of my clients in the last five years have been working for world-class research institutions and publishing in top-caliber journals. They still struggle with the finer points of formal language. Sometimes it's because they speak five other languages! So I reject the idea that something being well-written or someone being well-spoken indicates intelligence. My core clientele are stats people-- Big Data Revolution scientists who seem to have brains that are fundamentally incompatible with the rules of academic writing. I'm just the scribe they hire to get them past the shibboleths.
Post by: getsorted on July 15, 2022, 02:03:31 PM
The phrase I wish would go away is "Going forward," because it adds absolutely nothing in a language that has this handy thing called the future tense. But because there is no God and all existence is suffering, I am forced to use this phrase every day, because The Boss Likes It.
Post by: Paul der Krake on July 15, 2022, 06:52:25 PM
Sharp language is a symptom of sharp thinking. Pretending otherwise in a misguided attempt at inclusivity does everyone a disservice.
Post by: Metalcat on July 15, 2022, 07:36:20 PM
Being well spoken is 100% of sign of intelligence. It's not foolproof, there are people at the margins, immigrants, unconventional thinkers, blablabla. At the population level all that fades away and you can bet money all day long that the people with the better grasp of language are the intelligent ones.
Sharp language is a symptom of sharp thinking. Pretending otherwise in a misguided attempt at inclusivity does everyone a disservice.
But people can be "well spoken" in their own dialect.
I'm in Newfoundland right now and the English here is WILDLY different. Someone here is not less intelligent or clever because they speak Newfie English. Many of them can also code switch depending on who they're talking to.
Someone speaking a different dialect is not making errors, they are following a completely different set of linguistics rules. They are perfectly capable of expressing themselves and their complex thoughts.
Assuming someone who speaks a different dialect is less intelligent is as rational as saying that someone who speaks a.different language is less intelligent.
Someone who speaks Acadian is not speaking bad french, they are speaking a unique dialect that blends English and French with its own distinct structure. It is COMPLETELY different from the blend of French and English that occurs in regions where both languages are spoken and where people substitute words for each.
I can speak French and English and can understand the Franglais blend that is spoken at the border of Ontario and Quebec, but it is not a dialect. There is no specific structure, just common errors and substitutions made on each side. Although I speak both languages, I cannot understand Acadian at all. I can pick up words here and there, but the structure is fundamentally distinct, so it's like a totally different language to me.
Rarer dialects have just as many rules and structures are more dominant dialects. They aren't just a collection of mistakes, they are fully structured and can be analyzed as such with syntactic analysis.
It doesn't sound like you've actually studied languages at all, meanwhile I've spent countless hours mapping out the syntactic structures of many languages and even more dialects of those languages. I've spent hundreds of hours parsing the rules and interactions, it's mind blowingly complex when you get down to the granular level of syntax trees and prime structures.
This isn't some woke nonsense, this is a formal, highly technical academic subject that many people have doctorates in and they literally pretty much ALL agree on these very basic, first year level linguistic concepts.
This isn't obscure social theory, this is intro to linguistics level information. Basic survey knowledge. Arguing this is like someone in intro to chemistry arguing against the concept of electrons acting like both a wave and a particle.
Post by: ATtiny85 on July 15, 2022, 07:36:50 PM
Somehow we made it to the moon without being future skillinged. Or is that futured skilling?
Post by: ATtiny85 on July 15, 2022, 07:45:36 PM
This isn't some woke nonsense, this is a formal academic subject that many people have doctorates in and they literally pretty much ALL agree on these very basic, first year level linguistic concepts.
So the people making a living making a point about something agree there is a point to their point they are making?
I am with Paul der Krake in my life’s experience. If I talk to someone who is well spoken, they are generally intelligent. Naturally that does not mean someone who is not well spoken is not intelligent.
Eta: the first statement is me trying to be funny. Not discounting the academic work, just making a joke. Realized it likely reads differently than intended.
Post by: Metalcat on July 15, 2022, 07:56:14 PM
This isn't some woke nonsense, this is a formal academic subject that many people have doctorates in and they literally pretty much ALL agree on these very basic, first year level linguistic concepts.
So the people making a living making a point about something agree there is a point to their point they are making?
I am with Paul der Krake in my life’s experience. If I talk to someone who is well spoken, they are generally intelligent. Naturally that does not mean someone who is not well spoken is not intelligent.
Eta: the first statement is me trying to be funny. Not discounting the academic work, just making a joke. Realized it likely reads differently than intended.
It's not a coincidence that people who "speak properly" tend to be more intelligent, because education has a particular dialect, the one that people think is "correct."
My whole point, and I don't know how many times I can say this before my BRAIN FUCKING EXPLODES is that other dialects exist. They are not errors, they are different structures.
Many educated people who have learned the dialect of academia can easily code-switch between dialects with ease because they are fluent in both.
It's not that they learned better to stop making stupid errors and speak "right," it's that they learned a whole second set of linguistic structures and can switch fluently between them depending on the context.
As I said, I'm in Newfoundland right now. I don't speak Newfie, so many of the residents will code-switch so that I can understand them. They don't start speaking "correctly" they start speaking mainlander, which is not just a different dialect, it's almost a different language compared to Newfie.
Thanks for the clarification about the joke, I would not have taken it that way.
Post by: Josiecat22222 on July 15, 2022, 08:17:10 PM
I think there is space for both of these viewpoints to co-exist.
Post by: Paul der Krake on July 15, 2022, 08:34:17 PM
I don't think that @Paul der Krake and @Malcat points are necessarily mutually exclusive. As I understand it, Paul der krake stated that generally when one is well spoken, it is a marker of intelligence. Being able to clearly and effectively communicate one's thoughts is a central component of intelligence. However, he did not state the converse (that when one is not well spoken, they are not intelligent). I think that Malcat's points regarding various dialects having different rules which may not be immediately clear to non-native speakers is an important one.Right.
I think there is space for both of these viewpoints to co-exist.
There's something like 250 million French speakers, and I, a natural born citizen of France, am fully aware of the existence of some other dialects. As a person of reasonable intelligence, I am perfectly capable of making adjustments on the fly in how I perceive others when I interact with people who live in places as varied as Ivory Coast, French Polynesia, or Madagascar. I've never even heard of Acadian French, but I'm pretty sure I could adjust too.
But guess what, if you have a super limited vocabulary or your thoughts are vague and incoherent, I sure am going to think you're a dum dum.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on July 15, 2022, 08:53:33 PM
Okay so what? X% are road builders who build the roads that the food travels to the mills and processing plants. Y% are engineers who design the food plants that turn the raw materials into something tasty and shelf stable. Z% are the food plant workers. ABC% are the truck drivers, grocery store workers, bankers, etc. DEF% are the military and police and regulators who protect us from foreign invaders and help us generally follow the rules. And so on.
Yeah, we need farmers. But we need everyone else, too. Except maybe Elon Musk. I’m getting tired of his antics.
Post by: Metalcat on July 16, 2022, 05:14:14 AM
I don't think that @Paul der Krake and @Malcat points are necessarily mutually exclusive. As I understand it, Paul der krake stated that generally when one is well spoken, it is a marker of intelligence. Being able to clearly and effectively communicate one's thoughts is a central component of intelligence. However, he did not state the converse (that when one is not well spoken, they are not intelligent). I think that Malcat's points regarding various dialects having different rules which may not be immediately clear to non-native speakers is an important one.Right.
I think there is space for both of these viewpoints to co-exist.
There's something like 250 million French speakers, and I, a natural born citizen of France, am fully aware of the existence of some other dialects. As a person of reasonable intelligence, I am perfectly capable of making adjustments on the fly in how I perceive others when I interact with people who live in places as varied as Ivory Coast, French Polynesia, or Madagascar. I've never even heard of Acadian French, but I'm pretty sure I could adjust too.
But guess what, if you have a super limited vocabulary or your thoughts are vague and incoherent, I sure am going to think you're a dum dum.
I guess I don't understand your point though.
At no point has there been a debate about whether or not someone has a decent vocabulary or can barely speak their own language.
The ongoing argument has always been in this thread about people considering phrases and word constructs from other dialects to be errors. From there people claim that a certain dialect is correct and everything else isn't.
So since that's been the ongoing argument, when you come in and say what you said, I assume you're arguing that along those lines.
Post by: GuitarStv on July 17, 2022, 01:51:22 PM
In a world where women have been and still are often considered second class citizens, perhaps this use of language is necessary to help remind us that every person, wherever they fall on the gender or racial or other spectrum, should enjoy the same rights and freedoms as each white male property owner.
Indeed. If pregnant humans had always been called people, maybe we would give them rights based on their permanent, inalienable status as such, rather than taking them away based on their temporary status as pregnant second-class citizens trumping said rights.
Logic doesn't seem to follow.
Roe V. Wade was decided in '73, long before anyone had to identify pronouns commonly. It was repealed this year . . . right at about the time that more people than ever before were identifying their pronouns. It doesn't make sense to me that they would be linked in any significant way . . . but trying to argue that pronoun identification results in greater women's rights would seem to fly in the face of evidence.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on July 17, 2022, 06:26:07 PM
In a world where women have been and still are often considered second class citizens, perhaps this use of language is necessary to help remind us that every person, wherever they fall on the gender or racial or other spectrum, should enjoy the same rights and freedoms as each white male property owner.
Indeed. If pregnant humans had always been called people, maybe we would give them rights based on their permanent, inalienable status as such, rather than taking them away based on their temporary status as pregnant second-class citizens trumping said rights.
Logic doesn't seem to follow.
Roe V. Wade was decided in '73, long before anyone had to identify pronouns commonly. It was repealed this year . . . right at about the time that more people than ever before were identifying their pronouns. It doesn't make sense to me that they would be linked in any significant way . . . but trying to argue that pronoun identification results in greater women's rights would seem to fly in the face of evidence.
Maybe it gave more incentive to those who long for the 1950s to work harder?
More seriously, I think it shows that there are 2 distinct societies re these social attitudes. One has managed to shift social views and the other has grabbed the levers of power.
Post by: FIRE Artist on July 17, 2022, 07:40:22 PM
I am an Anglophone, grew up in Moncton and took my entire 12 years of grade schooling in French immersion (where we were taught formal French) and still could not really converse with my neighbours. It was a waste of time if that was the goal.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on July 17, 2022, 08:40:19 PM
Acadian is really tough for outsiders to pick up, it isn’t just slang (there is a lot of that), but includes the usage of old words that are not typically used by other native French speakers. It would be the equivalent of someone using obscure Old English words in conversation and blend in some Mikmaq for shits and giggles. Their version of Franglais is called Chiac.
I am an Anglophone, grew up in Moncton and took my entire 12 years of grade schooling in French immersion (where we were taught formal French) and still could not really converse with my neighbours. It was a waste of time if that was the goal.
I grew up in Montreal and also had formal French. I could not understand people at all on the bus - I had not learned joual. I was fine at academic meetings where people spoke more formally. The weirdest thing is, I read someplace that Quebec English is a formal dialect - I just thought we had vocabulary issues. I had no idea what a 7-11 was when I went to University in Ontario. And of course I knew no-one would understand me when I talked about going to the dep (depanneur).
Post by: sui generis on July 17, 2022, 08:42:49 PM
This instance was on a podcast and the podcast host was asking the interviewee something to the effect of, "Well, isn't it true that....(something that is true)" and the interviewee responded, "No, that's exactly right."
I don't know. Do others here have a sense of times it makes more sense to use a negative even when you're not negating anything and when it's not and goes too far? Does it seem like the sentence above is not going too far to anyone? (Admittedly, hearing it makes a big difference...I think the interviewee sort of paused after saying no, but before the rest of the sentence and I thought they were actually disagreeing about the thing for a moment.)
Post by: FIRE Artist on July 17, 2022, 09:04:13 PM
I think it's been mentioned before, but using "no" when you really mean "yes" is bothering me lately. It's funny because I think before I've understood that it *felt* right even if there technically wasn't anything being negated. But recently there was a use of it that made me wonder if I'm getting old and I've un-accepted something I've previously been willing to roll with, or if this use was just so egregious that it doesn't work, while other uses have some subtlety or nuance about them, which I can't articulate, that makes them different and more ok.
This instance was on a podcast and the podcast host was asking the interviewee something to the effect of, "Well, isn't it true that....(something that is true)" and the interviewee responded, "No, that's exactly right."
I don't know. Do others here have a sense of times it makes more sense to use a negative even when you're not negating anything and when it's not and goes too far? Does it seem like the sentence above is not going too far to anyone? (Admittedly, hearing it makes a big difference...I think the interviewee sort of paused after saying no, but before the rest of the sentence and I thought they were actually disagreeing about the thing for a moment.)
We do this a lot in Canada, I didn’t really know how much until I saw a TicTok about it, and was like yeah, no, we do that all the time! Haha.
yeah, no
No, yeah
Yeah nooooo
Post by: Padonak on July 17, 2022, 09:33:22 PM
Post by: sui generis on July 17, 2022, 09:55:48 PM
I think it's been mentioned before, but using "no" when you really mean "yes" is bothering me lately. It's funny because I think before I've understood that it *felt* right even if there technically wasn't anything being negated. But recently there was a use of it that made me wonder if I'm getting old and I've un-accepted something I've previously been willing to roll with, or if this use was just so egregious that it doesn't work, while other uses have some subtlety or nuance about them, which I can't articulate, that makes them different and more ok.
This instance was on a podcast and the podcast host was asking the interviewee something to the effect of, "Well, isn't it true that....(something that is true)" and the interviewee responded, "No, that's exactly right."
I don't know. Do others here have a sense of times it makes more sense to use a negative even when you're not negating anything and when it's not and goes too far? Does it seem like the sentence above is not going too far to anyone? (Admittedly, hearing it makes a big difference...I think the interviewee sort of paused after saying no, but before the rest of the sentence and I thought they were actually disagreeing about the thing for a moment.)
We do this a lot in Canada, I didn’t really know how much until I saw a TicTok about it, and was like yeah, no, we do that all the time! Haha.
yeah, no
No, yeah
Yeah nooooo
Ok, you've clarified something for me about when I've seen those used successfully. I think the times I've used Yeah, no (and I used to use it a lot) and I heard it used, the Yeah is ....sarcastic? Like you're faking out that you agree with what the person just said, but then you really vehemently disagree and saying yeah first and then flipping it actually emphasizes how adverse you actually are to it. This is really going far back (to like the 80s?), but for me it's a little similar to when someone would pretend like they were agreeing with you or on your side about something and then, "Psych!" Yeah, no is the more modern Psych.
Sometimes I've seen No, yeah work. Like if Person 1 says they hate ice cream, there's nothing redeeming about it, and Person 2 says, "Well, it's nice on a hot day, no?" and then Person 1 realizes they made an overly ambitious declaration and says, "No, yeah that's true." so it's like they are negating, not what Person 2 said, but almost back to what they said initially.
But the example I just heard was not that. The No, yeah didn't serve any purpose that I can see. Thank you for helping me realize what was bothering me about this one when I was usually fine with it before!
Post by: Metalcat on July 18, 2022, 05:30:31 AM
Withdrawal (as a verb)
Wait...what?
Post by: Morning Glory on July 18, 2022, 05:54:30 AM
Withdrawal (as a verb)
Wait...what?
Yep
It's pronounced "with drawl". It's a regional/ethnic pronunciation, like "exscape".
Post by: merula on July 18, 2022, 08:39:58 AM
Withdrawal (as a verb)
Wait...what?
Yep
It's pronounced "with drawl". It's a regional/ethnic pronunciation, like "exscape".
My question isn't on the pronunciation, it's how the noun form of the verb "to withdraw" is used as a verb itself. "I withdrawalled my money from the account."?
Post by: GuitarStv on July 18, 2022, 08:51:24 AM
Withdrawal (as a verb)
Wait...what?
Yep
It's pronounced "with drawl". It's a regional/ethnic pronunciation, like "exscape".
My question isn't on the pronunciation, it's how the noun form of the verb "to withdraw" is used as a verb itself. "I withdrawalled my money from the account."?
A sufficiently motivated person can verb any word with a little effort.
Post by: Metalcat on July 18, 2022, 10:40:47 AM
Withdrawal (as a verb)
Wait...what?
Yep
It's pronounced "with drawl". It's a regional/ethnic pronunciation, like "exscape".
My question isn't on the pronunciation, it's how the noun form of the verb "to withdraw" is used as a verb itself. "I withdrawalled my money from the account."?
Yeah, I'm also not asking about pronunciation, nor do I see a problem with pronouncing it "with-drawl" that's how everyone I've ever heard say it pronounces it.
But how on earth are people using withdrawal as a verb when withdraw is already a verb??
Post by: Morning Glory on July 18, 2022, 11:02:48 AM
They pronounce withdraw and withdrawal the same way. I think they probably realize there are two different words so its just a pronunciation thing. I have also heard "withdrawaling" from college educated people as in "the patient in room 10 is withdrawaling from heroin" . Same region where "crayon" and "crown" sound the same.Withdrawal (as a verb)
Wait...what?
Yep
It's pronounced "with drawl". It's a regional/ethnic pronunciation, like "exscape".
My question isn't on the pronunciation, it's how the noun form of the verb "to withdraw" is used as a verb itself. "I withdrawalled my money from the account."?
Yeah, I'm also not asking about pronunciation, nor do I see a problem with pronouncing it "with-drawl" that's how everyone I've ever heard say it pronounces it.
But how on earth are people using withdrawal as a verb when withdraw is already a verb??
Post by: Davnasty on July 18, 2022, 12:01:59 PM
I think it's been mentioned before, but using "no" when you really mean "yes" is bothering me lately. It's funny because I think before I've understood that it *felt* right even if there technically wasn't anything being negated. But recently there was a use of it that made me wonder if I'm getting old and I've un-accepted something I've previously been willing to roll with, or if this use was just so egregious that it doesn't work, while other uses have some subtlety or nuance about them, which I can't articulate, that makes them different and more ok.
This instance was on a podcast and the podcast host was asking the interviewee something to the effect of, "Well, isn't it true that....(something that is true)" and the interviewee responded, "No, that's exactly right."
I don't know. Do others here have a sense of times it makes more sense to use a negative even when you're not negating anything and when it's not and goes too far? Does it seem like the sentence above is not going too far to anyone? (Admittedly, hearing it makes a big difference...I think the interviewee sort of paused after saying no, but before the rest of the sentence and I thought they were actually disagreeing about the thing for a moment.)
In this particular case, perhaps the use of "isn't" threw them off a bit?
If the interviewer had asked "Well, is it true that....(something that is true)" maybe the interviewee would have responded, "Yes, that's exactly right."
In either case I think "Yes" would have been the better word choice but it's admittedly weird that is and isn't mean the same thing in this instance. (Mostly the same. Using isn't rather than is usually makes it less of a question and more of a lead in.)
Post by: sui generis on July 18, 2022, 12:49:10 PM
I think it's been mentioned before, but using "no" when you really mean "yes" is bothering me lately. It's funny because I think before I've understood that it *felt* right even if there technically wasn't anything being negated. But recently there was a use of it that made me wonder if I'm getting old and I've un-accepted something I've previously been willing to roll with, or if this use was just so egregious that it doesn't work, while other uses have some subtlety or nuance about them, which I can't articulate, that makes them different and more ok.
This instance was on a podcast and the podcast host was asking the interviewee something to the effect of, "Well, isn't it true that....(something that is true)" and the interviewee responded, "No, that's exactly right."
I don't know. Do others here have a sense of times it makes more sense to use a negative even when you're not negating anything and when it's not and goes too far? Does it seem like the sentence above is not going too far to anyone? (Admittedly, hearing it makes a big difference...I think the interviewee sort of paused after saying no, but before the rest of the sentence and I thought they were actually disagreeing about the thing for a moment.)
In this particular case, perhaps the use of "isn't" threw them off a bit?
If the interviewer had asked "Well, is it true that....(something that is true)" maybe the interviewee would have responded, "Yes, that's exactly right."
In either case I think "Yes" would have been the better word choice but it's admittedly weird that is and isn't mean the same thing in this instance. (Mostly the same. Using isn't rather than is usually makes it less of a question and more of a lead in.)
Interesting thought! Yes, I wonder if that could have something to do with it.
Also the isn't vs. is construction, now that you point it out, is interesting as well. The interviewer is a lawyer and that construction seems very cross-examine-y to me, although in this case the interviewee was not a "hostile witness" at all.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on July 18, 2022, 01:01:16 PM
Withdrawal (as a verb)For me, it's when someone adds a uncalled-for s, as in "going through withdrawals." Argh!
Post by: Tigerpine on July 18, 2022, 02:25:04 PM
I recently said congratulations to an old lady (in her 90's) who just sold her house recently. I thought that genuinely deserved congratulations.Over the last decade I've noticed the word "investment" applied to anything and everything that people pay for, including insurance, expensive tools, home improvements and even vacations. Typically it seems like a marketing ploy to make people feel like they are making a smart decision by trading their money for "X".It is beyond doubt a marketing strategy, and I also find it less than amusing.
Similarly, I hate it when a company tells you "Congratulations!" after you make a purchase. I'm sure they do that to make you feel better about your choice, but I think that secretly the only real congratulations go to the salesperson who made the sale.
I was surprised and a little taken aback at the number of people who said "congratulations!" to us each time we've purchased a home.
I don't know why taking out a mortgage for a home is reason to congratulate someone. But it seems to be the de-facto response whenever someone learns we bought (and are not renting) our home.
When you truly own your home (not sharing co-ownership with the bank) we will all say "Congratulations" to you. Because it may or may not be a rewarding financial investment, but it is an investment in so many other aspects of your lives. Right now any congratulation are just for saving up enough for a down payment. Hmm, actually that is something worth congratulating you for, you have managed to show the commitment to get that savings.
Hmm, some things are investments, in that in the long run they may make or save money. And I am firmly convinced that we need to compare apples to apples. If I garden and someone says my tomatoes cost $.xx each, my reaction is to say $.xx is the store price for ordinary tomatoes. What is the price for organic tomatoes, since my tomatoes are organic and I know exactly what was involved in their growing. Or if someone buys a freezer (an upfront cost) but over the next 10 years they save a bundle by freezing things bought on sale (i.e. produce at its peak, meat on sale, etc.) then it would be an investment. I invested in equipment for canning, because I just can't buy relish as yummy as the relish I make. I don't even care if I am saving money (I am), I care about the quality I can get by making my own.
However, coming back on topic, most congratulations seem to be for things that won't show that kind of return. Because they are fun or flashy or improve one's image, not because they are truly useful.
Post by: slackmax on July 18, 2022, 04:50:39 PM
It is 'partner', used to refer to one's 'significant other' (I don't mind 'significant other', by the way, for some reason, ha ha).
Ex. "Joe and his partner went swimming. "
Hmmmm. I wonder if Joe's partner is a guy, a girl, an animal, a robot? Am I not supposed to need that information? Is it none of my business?
Post by: BlueHouse on July 18, 2022, 06:33:43 PM
Withdrawal (as a verb)
yep. I don't think some have seen/heard the difference between withdraw / withdrawal
I also get the impression that bad/worse/worst is no longer taught although no one seems to have much trouble with good/better/best
Post by: Metalcat on July 18, 2022, 06:35:32 PM
May have mentioned thine before, but it still bugs me, and it hasn't gone away!
It is 'partner', used to refer to one's 'significant other' (I don't mind 'significant other', by the way, for some reason, ha ha).
Ex. "Joe and his partner went swimming. "
Hmmmm. I wonder if Joe's partner is a guy, a girl, an animal, a robot? Am I not supposed to need that information? Is it none of my business?
I don't think I'm quite understanding.
You don't like "partner" because it doesn't convey the gender of the person's spouse? But you're okay with "significant other?" What about spouse?
I go out of my way to use gender neutral language because it's the only option for gay people to not out themselves in casual conversation, and the more straight people who do the same, the more ambiguous the term "partner" becomes instead of automatically making people assume "gay partner."
To me, it's also no one's damn business what my spouse's genitals are.
Post by: Dollar Slice on July 18, 2022, 06:51:36 PM
It is 'partner', used to refer to one's 'significant other'
I usually use partner when it's an older person who is in a serious relationship but not married. Like my friends who are late 60s/early 70s and living together for 10 years, it feels weirdly childish to call them "girlfriend" and "boyfriend."
Post by: Kris on July 18, 2022, 06:54:33 PM
May have mentioned thine before, but it still bugs me, and it hasn't gone away!
It is 'partner', used to refer to one's 'significant other' (I don't mind 'significant other', by the way, for some reason, ha ha).
Ex. "Joe and his partner went swimming. "
Hmmmm. I wonder if Joe's partner is a guy, a girl, an animal, a robot? Am I not supposed to need that information? Is it none of my business?
It’s extremely weird to me how some people need to know whether my partner has a dick and balls or a vagina.
Like…
Maybe back off?
Post by: GuitarStv on July 19, 2022, 07:13:39 AM
GuitarStv - he/him/his - dick n'balls (personal) - vagina (partner) - shaven legs (cycling) - guitarded but basscurious
Post by: FIRE Artist on July 19, 2022, 07:22:39 AM
It is 'partner', used to refer to one's 'significant other'
I usually use partner when it's an older person who is in a serious relationship but not married. Like my friends who are late 60s/early 70s and living together for 10 years, it feels weirdly childish to call them "girlfriend" and "boyfriend."
Nothing about “partner” means in particular an older couple to me, it is also used by the overwhelmingly large trend of young couples cohabitating prior to or in lieu of marriage. When older couples don’t and sometimes do live together, I often hear that generation refer to that as their “special friend”, companion etc. Partner is a Gen X and younger thing in my circle.
Either way, I don’t get why anyone would rail against a word that acknowledges partnership/equality instead of ownership/power imbalance in a relationship, no matter what genders are involved, and whether or not a legal piece of paper exists. I think it is a fantastic term and 100% support its use in all contexts young or old.
Post by: Dee on July 19, 2022, 07:33:06 AM
Post by: dignam on July 19, 2022, 08:41:21 AM
Maybe we should just tag it into our signatures to avoid confusion.
GuitarStv - he/him/his - dick n'balls (personal) - vagina (partner) - shaven legs (cycling) - guitarded but basscurious
LOL
re: partner. My "partner" and I have been together about 6 years now, living together most of it. We aren't married but it feels a little weird to call each other boyfriend/girlfriend at this point. My closest friends will sometimes refer to her as "the lady" or "the wife" (like "the wife going to join us?") but would never say to me "your wife". I probably use partner or significant other mostly.
Post by: Dollar Slice on July 19, 2022, 09:12:30 AM
Nothing about “partner” means in particular an older couple to me, it is also used by the overwhelmingly large trend of young couples cohabitating prior to or in lieu of marriage. When older couples don’t and sometimes do live together, I often hear that generation refer to that as their “special friend”, companion etc. Partner is a Gen X and younger thing in my circle.
Well, I'm Gen X, so there you go. What word is better than partner if boyfriend/girlfriend doesn't sound right? I don't particularly like it - it's kind of an ugly word - but I don't think anything else works in casual conversation. "Let me introduce you to my friend, Bob, and his partner, Jane." I'm pretty sure those friends I mentioned use the word partner, too - I can't remember ever hearing them use "girlfriend" or "boyfriend" and we've known each other for years.
Now, "special friend" is a phrase I wish would go away... it sounds like a really creepy euphemism to me that only bad people would use. (I know nice people use it. But that's what it conjures up in my mind.)
Post by: Tyson on July 19, 2022, 10:32:14 AM
Post by: Metalcat on July 19, 2022, 11:27:54 AM
Partner is fine but maybe a little awkward. I also like "SO" short for significant other.
But why is "partner" considered "awkward?"
The only reason I can think of is because it's so commonly associated with homosexuality, so when someone says it, the listener can't just default to hetero assumptions.
If you have another reason why it would be awkward, I'm totally open to hearing it.
Post by: zolotiyeruki on July 19, 2022, 12:23:55 PM
Upthread a bit, it's mentioned that "partner" can be used in other contexts beyond an interpersonal relationship, for example a business partner. At least for me, the word "partner" has a stronger connection to a business relationship than a personal one, perhaps because it has been used in the context of business for far longer.Partner is fine but maybe a little awkward. I also like "SO" short for significant other.
But why is "partner" considered "awkward?"
The only reason I can think of is because it's so commonly associated with homosexuality, so when someone says it, the listener can't just default to hetero assumptions.
If you have another reason why it would be awkward, I'm totally open to hearing it.
Post by: Metalcat on July 19, 2022, 01:12:42 PM
Upthread a bit, it's mentioned that "partner" can be used in other contexts beyond an interpersonal relationship, for example a business partner. At least for me, the word "partner" has a stronger connection to a business relationship than a personal one, perhaps because it has been used in the context of business for far longer.Partner is fine but maybe a little awkward. I also like "SO" short for significant other.
But why is "partner" considered "awkward?"
The only reason I can think of is because it's so commonly associated with homosexuality, so when someone says it, the listener can't just default to hetero assumptions.
If you have another reason why it would be awkward, I'm totally open to hearing it.
True, but it's a very, very rare context where someone is talking about a business partner and it's ambiguous if they mean their spouse. Or the person usually specifies "business partner" when the context is ambiguous.
It doesn't take much context to clarify in those cases. So I'm still not quite getting how it's "awkward" for anyone. Ambiguous? Perhaps, but I don't get how ambiguity necessarily creates awkwardness.
We tolerate an enormous amount of ambiguity in other relational terms. The word "friend" is about obtuse as they come. It can mean someone so precious you would donate body parts to them without question, or someone you haven't seen in years, or a work acquaintance you occasionally joke with, or a friend of a friend you don't even like.
And yet we all handle that ambiguity in conversation without finding it awkward by relying on the details of the conversation.
But I do appreciate the feedback.
Post by: Tyson on July 19, 2022, 01:56:57 PM
Upthread a bit, it's mentioned that "partner" can be used in other contexts beyond an interpersonal relationship, for example a business partner. At least for me, the word "partner" has a stronger connection to a business relationship than a personal one, perhaps because it has been used in the context of business for far longer.Partner is fine but maybe a little awkward. I also like "SO" short for significant other.
But why is "partner" considered "awkward?"
The only reason I can think of is because it's so commonly associated with homosexuality, so when someone says it, the listener can't just default to hetero assumptions.
If you have another reason why it would be awkward, I'm totally open to hearing it.
True, but it's a very, very rare context where someone is talking about a business partner and it's ambiguous if they mean their spouse. Or the person usually specifies "business partner" when the context is ambiguous.
It doesn't take much context to clarify in those cases. So I'm still not quite getting how it's "awkward" for anyone. Ambiguous? Perhaps, but I don't get how ambiguity necessarily creates awkwardness.
We tolerate an enormous amount of ambiguity in other relational terms. The word "friend" is about obtuse as they come. It can mean someone so precious you would donate body parts to them without question, or someone you haven't seen in years, or a work acquaintance you occasionally joke with, or a friend of a friend you don't even like.
And yet we all handle that ambiguity in conversation without finding it awkward by relying on the details of the conversation.
But I do appreciate the feedback.
Like I said, I'm fine with partner, it's certainly used enough in my circles to be pretty commonplace and I got used to it a while back.
Re: why might some people find it awkward? If someone says 'she's my partner', it's not clear if it's a personal relationship of a professional one. That's all.
Post by: slackmax on July 20, 2022, 07:41:25 AM
I see it on game shows on TV a lot. The contestant is introducing him or herself and mentions a husband or wife back home, which clearly indicates homosexuality, and there is no gasp from the audience.
Post by: Metalcat on July 20, 2022, 11:15:31 AM
I suppose I'm a bit too idealistic, but I would think a gay man married to another man would be proud to refer to him as a husband, without needing to hide anything. Same logic for lesbians. 'Meet my gorgeous wife, Sally'.
I see it on game shows on TV a lot. The contestant is introducing him or herself and mentions a husband or wife back home, which clearly indicates homosexuality, and there is no gasp from the audience.
I...uh...I'm going to leave this for someone else to handle.
But yes, you are definitely missing something.
Post by: HPstache on July 20, 2022, 12:52:03 PM
"I was today years old when I discovered..."
Annoying AF.
Post by: Metalcat on July 20, 2022, 02:02:38 PM
Has this one been mentioned yet:
"I was today years old when I discovered..."
Annoying AF.
Yeah, I didn't mind it at first, but it's past it's expiry date IMO
Post by: RWD on July 20, 2022, 05:16:03 PM
Has this one been mentioned yet:
"I was today years old when I discovered..."
Annoying AF.
Yeah, I didn't mind it at first, but it's past it's expiry date IMO
It's now self-describing!
Post by: FIRE Artist on July 20, 2022, 05:32:01 PM
I suppose I'm a bit too idealistic, but I would think a gay man married to another man would be proud to refer to him as a husband, without needing to hide anything. Same logic for lesbians. 'Meet my gorgeous wife, Sally'.
I see it on game shows on TV a lot. The contestant is introducing him or herself and mentions a husband or wife back home, which clearly indicates homosexuality, and there is no gasp from the audience.
I...uh...I'm going to leave this for someone else to handle.
But yes, you are definitely missing something.
Because many couples who cohabitate are not married so wouldn’t use terms like husband and wife to refer to their significant other? And people in committed cohabitation relationships typically abandon the terms boyfriend/girlfriend as for many, many people that implies a dating relationship, not a deep commitment which comes with sharing households and often finances or even children. And some people who are married do not hold with the Christian idea of marriage and feel that partnership better defines their legal union.
I don’t think any of this has anything to do with hiding one’s orientation or relationship status, but even if it were, I don’t think it is anyone’s business to know the coupling details of casual acquaintances.
Post by: Metalcat on July 21, 2022, 05:00:57 AM
I suppose I'm a bit too idealistic, but I would think a gay man married to another man would be proud to refer to him as a husband, without needing to hide anything. Same logic for lesbians. 'Meet my gorgeous wife, Sally'.
I see it on game shows on TV a lot. The contestant is introducing him or herself and mentions a husband or wife back home, which clearly indicates homosexuality, and there is no gasp from the audience.
I...uh...I'm going to leave this for someone else to handle.
But yes, you are definitely missing something.
Because many couples who cohabitate are not married so wouldn’t use terms like husband and wife to refer to their significant other? And people in committed cohabitation relationships typically abandon the terms boyfriend/girlfriend as for many, many people that implies a dating relationship, not a deep commitment which comes with sharing households and often finances or even children. And some people who are married do not hold with the Christian idea of marriage and feel that partnership better defines their legal union.
I don’t think any of this has anything to do with hiding one’s orientation or relationship status, but even if it were, I don’t think it is anyone’s business to know the coupling details of casual acquaintances.
I think they were responding to my previous comment about people not necessarily wanting to out themselves in casual conversation.
I wasn't implying that people necessarily don't want to out themselves, just that they often want some control over how and when they do so, especially with new people.
Just because a game show audience doesn't gasp doesn't mean there isn't very, very real risk.
Post by: teen persuasion on July 21, 2022, 06:46:27 AM
Wife/husband/spouse all imply romantic relationship + married.
Significant other implies romantic relationship, official marriage status ambiguous, but essentially equivalent level of commitment.
Boyfriend/girlfriend may be a dating relationship, may be more serious, but definitely unmarried.
Partner is ambiguous on romantic vs other type of relationship, like business, and requires modification or context to clarify. Also ambiguous on marriage status, if applied to romantic relationships.
So partner feels the most ambiguous, which may be a plus if deliberate ambiguity is the goal. It has few connotations of gender, unlike many of the other choices.
Post by: Kris on July 21, 2022, 08:56:14 AM
To me, the different terms have differing connotations:
Wife/husband/spouse all imply romantic relationship + married.
Significant other implies romantic relationship, official marriage status ambiguous, but essentially equivalent level of commitment.
Boyfriend/girlfriend may be a dating relationship, may be more serious, but definitely unmarried.
Partner is ambiguous on romantic vs other type of relationship, like business, and requires modification or context to clarify. Also ambiguous on marriage status, if applied to romantic relationships.
So partner feels the most ambiguous, which may be a plus if deliberate ambiguity is the goal. It has few connotations of gender, unlike many of the other choices.
Significant other sounds a lot more ambiguous to me in terms of seriousness of the relationship, plus it sounds really clinical.
Partner sounds more permanent. And like a relationship between equals
Boyfriend and girlfriend are weird past a certain age.
If I was not married, but in an enduring relationship, I’m pretty sure I’d use partner.
Post by: Paul der Krake on July 21, 2022, 05:53:17 PM
I don't have a better word to offer.
Post by: Dancin'Dog on July 21, 2022, 08:07:35 PM
Post by: Tyson on July 21, 2022, 09:13:24 PM
Post by: BlueHouse on July 22, 2022, 05:18:06 AM
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Post by: Josiecat22222 on July 22, 2022, 06:30:04 AM
Post by: BussoV6 on July 22, 2022, 06:46:59 AM
Post by: merula on July 22, 2022, 06:50:27 AM
Penultimate
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Interesting! I love this word and will use it in mundane situations like "I've taken the penultimate ice cream sandwich".
How are you hearing it used?
Post by: GuitarStv on July 22, 2022, 07:02:47 AM
Penultimate
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Interesting! I love this word and will use it in mundane situations like "I've taken the penultimate ice cream sandwich".
How are you hearing it used?
I will admit to believing that penultimate meant 'best' rather than 'second last' for a very long time, and probably used it that way a few times.
Post by: Metalcat on July 22, 2022, 08:00:10 AM
Penultimate
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Interesting! I love this word and will use it in mundane situations like "I've taken the penultimate ice cream sandwich".
How are you hearing it used?
I will admit to believing that penultimate meant 'best' rather than 'second last' for a very long time, and probably used it that way a few times.
Yep, I would say that about 80% of the people I've heard use this term use it to mean "ultimate" as in "the best."
I had one acquaintance who used it all the time with a massive emphasis on the "PEN" part, as if that was what emphasized just how "ultimate" the object of her positive appraisal was.
Post by: Kris on July 22, 2022, 08:13:08 AM
Penultimate
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Interesting! I love this word and will use it in mundane situations like "I've taken the penultimate ice cream sandwich".
How are you hearing it used?
I will admit to believing that penultimate meant 'best' rather than 'second last' for a very long time, and probably used it that way a few times.
Yep, I would say that about 80% of the people I've heard use this term use it to mean "ultimate" as in "the best."
I had one acquaintance who used it all the time with a massive emphasis on the "PEN" part, as if that was what emphasized just how "ultimate" the object of her positive appraisal was.
Huh. This is so weird. I'm not sure I've ever heard it used incorrectly.
Post by: Metalcat on July 22, 2022, 11:20:29 AM
Penultimate
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Interesting! I love this word and will use it in mundane situations like "I've taken the penultimate ice cream sandwich".
How are you hearing it used?
I will admit to believing that penultimate meant 'best' rather than 'second last' for a very long time, and probably used it that way a few times.
Yep, I would say that about 80% of the people I've heard use this term use it to mean "ultimate" as in "the best."
I had one acquaintance who used it all the time with a massive emphasis on the "PEN" part, as if that was what emphasized just how "ultimate" the object of her positive appraisal was.
Huh. This is so weird. I'm not sure I've ever heard it used incorrectly.
To be fair, almost every instance I've ever heard someone use the word was in high school, and the acquaintance I mentioned was class president, so I'm pretty sure she's the one who infected everyone else with the incorrect usage.
Otherwise, I just don't think I've heard the word spoken much since then.
Post by: Dicey on July 22, 2022, 11:46:05 AM
Ha! I have a supersmart friend. So smart, he got his MBA and his JD from two top universities in three years concurrently, by cobbling together his own program. That's some seriously creative DIY. He always thought this word meant the opposite until someone called him out early in his career. I always smile inwardly and think of him (and his wildly successful career) when I hear this word.Penultimate
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Interesting! I love this word and will use it in mundane situations like "I've taken the penultimate ice cream sandwich".
How are you hearing it used?
I will admit to believing that penultimate meant 'best' rather than 'second last' for a very long time, and probably used it that way a few times.
Yep, I would say that about 80% of the people I've heard use this term use it to mean "ultimate" as in "the best."
I had one acquaintance who used it all the time with a massive emphasis on the "PEN" part, as if that was what emphasized just how "ultimate" the object of her positive appraisal was.
Huh. This is so weird. I'm not sure I've ever heard it used incorrectly.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on July 22, 2022, 11:49:53 AM
Post by: Kris on July 22, 2022, 11:52:11 AM
Ha! I have a supersmart friend. So smart, he got his MBA and his JD from two top universities in three years concurrently, by cobbling together his own program. That's some seriously creative DIY. He always thought this word meant the opposite until someone called him out early in his career. I always smile inwardly and think of him (and his wildly successful career) when I hear this word.Penultimate
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Interesting! I love this word and will use it in mundane situations like "I've taken the penultimate ice cream sandwich".
How are you hearing it used?
I will admit to believing that penultimate meant 'best' rather than 'second last' for a very long time, and probably used it that way a few times.
Yep, I would say that about 80% of the people I've heard use this term use it to mean "ultimate" as in "the best."
I had one acquaintance who used it all the time with a massive emphasis on the "PEN" part, as if that was what emphasized just how "ultimate" the object of her positive appraisal was.
Huh. This is so weird. I'm not sure I've ever heard it used incorrectly.
Speaking of thinking that a word means the opposite, "nonplussed" is one of the biggest examples I can think of it. Almost always when I hear it used in the wild, people mean "unaffected" or "underwhelmed."
Post by: Taran Wanderer on July 22, 2022, 11:52:29 AM
Post by: Kris on July 22, 2022, 11:53:51 AM
Brings back memories of college track. The penultimate step in your high jump approach is critical to set up the final step / jump.
Small tangent:
There is a cocktail made with gin and green Chartreuse called a "Last Word." DH, who loves his cocktails, made a variation on it using yellow Chartreuse. He calls it the "Penultimate Word."
Post by: Metalcat on July 22, 2022, 12:42:22 PM
Ha! I have a supersmart friend. So smart, he got his MBA and his JD from two top universities in three years concurrently, by cobbling together his own program. That's some seriously creative DIY. He always thought this word meant the opposite until someone called him out early in his career. I always smile inwardly and think of him (and his wildly successful career) when I hear this word.
Omg, this reminds me of my father, who is well educated and phenomenally well read, but English isn't his first language, so there are a few words floating around in his mental compendium that trip him up. To this day, no matter how many times I correct him, he still thinks that "perfunctory" is somehow related to "perfectionism."
Of course, he likes his own reality better than everyone else's, so it's not so much a matter of him being unable to understand that he's wrong, but more that he's unwilling, and doesn't consider respecting the true meaning of "perfunctory" to be important to him.
He's a character that one. He also likes to lob fake facts into the universe just for fun, it makes talking to him a bit treacherous since he's so incredibly well informed, he can easily hide a made up fact within a long, well supported discourse on anything.
The dude is kind of nuts.
Post by: jambongris on July 22, 2022, 12:52:46 PM
From a crossword I did today:Brings back memories of college track. The penultimate step in your high jump approach is critical to set up the final step / jump.
Small tangent:
There is a cocktail made with gin and green Chartreuse called a "Last Word." DH, who loves his cocktails, made a variation on it using yellow Chartreuse. He calls it the "Penultimate Word."
« Like X in the alphabet. »
Spoiler: show
Post by: iluvzbeach on July 22, 2022, 01:44:31 PM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on July 22, 2022, 01:50:39 PM
Same thing with the word peruse. So many people think it means to quickly review vs. it’s actual meaning of very thoroughly or carefully.I just learned something--I thought it meant something similar to "browse"
Post by: Metalcat on July 22, 2022, 01:54:01 PM
Same thing with the word peruse. So many people think it means to quickly review vs. it’s actual meaning of very thoroughly or carefully.
Yup, that's why as a store owner, it's super annoying when people peruse and don't buy.
My suspicion is that it's the retail context where it's so often used that makes people think it's the same as "browse."
Post by: BlueHouse on July 22, 2022, 02:05:33 PM
so.... did you mean that as you took the second to last sandwich? excitement to let others know there's one left? If so, I'll have to start doing that because it sounds fun.Penultimate
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Interesting! I love this word and will use it in mundane situations like "I've taken the penultimate ice cream sandwich".
How are you hearing it used?
Honestly, I just always thought it was a superlative, rather than what I guess would be an ordinal placement. I'm not good at words, so I'm sure I'm describing this incorrectly. But now that I know what it means, I never think anyone else knows the true meaning. And one of the guys on the TDF commentary keeps using it. But it's always hard to know exactly what the meaning was...so it's one of those words where you're usually not sure if they're using it wrong.
Post by: BlueHouse on July 22, 2022, 02:15:14 PM
Both of these will help me remember the proper usage. Thanks you!Brings back memories of college track. The penultimate step in your high jump approach is critical to set up the final step / jump.
Small tangent:
There is a cocktail made with gin and green Chartreuse called a "Last Word." DH, who loves his cocktails, made a variation on it using yellow Chartreuse. He calls it the "Penultimate Word."
Post by: Davnasty on July 22, 2022, 02:54:42 PM
I'm not good at words
Thanks you!
:)
Post by: slackmax on July 23, 2022, 09:28:56 AM
Post by: Dicey on July 23, 2022, 09:40:31 AM
Penultimate. I remember that word from my Spanish class. As in 'the accent is on the penultimate syllable'. Meaning 'second to last'. Pretty straightforward.Sure, if you have an explanation in the first place. Or second to last place.
Post by: Metalcat on July 23, 2022, 09:43:00 AM
Penultimate. I remember that word from my Spanish class. As in 'the accent is on the penultimate syllable'. Meaning 'second to last'. Pretty straightforward.Sure, if you have an explanation in the first place. Or second to last place.
HA!
Post by: sui generis on July 24, 2022, 02:59:21 PM
Ha! I have a supersmart friend. So smart, he got his MBA and his JD from two top universities in three years concurrently, by cobbling together his own program. That's some seriously creative DIY. He always thought this word meant the opposite until someone called him out early in his career. I always smile inwardly and think of him (and his wildly successful career) when I hear this word.Penultimate
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Interesting! I love this word and will use it in mundane situations like "I've taken the penultimate ice cream sandwich".
How are you hearing it used?
I will admit to believing that penultimate meant 'best' rather than 'second last' for a very long time, and probably used it that way a few times.
Yep, I would say that about 80% of the people I've heard use this term use it to mean "ultimate" as in "the best."
I had one acquaintance who used it all the time with a massive emphasis on the "PEN" part, as if that was what emphasized just how "ultimate" the object of her positive appraisal was.
Huh. This is so weird. I'm not sure I've ever heard it used incorrectly.
Speaking of thinking that a word means the opposite, "nonplussed" is one of the biggest examples I can think of it. Almost always when I hear it used in the wild, people mean "unaffected" or "underwhelmed."
I basically never hear it used right either, but I do have sympathy on this word for people that are intuiting or inferring the meaning of something they have just read or heard once or twice in their lives. Based on normal reasoning, the word should mean "not plussed" but what the hell is "plussed"? Sounds legitimately like a word that might mean something like bothered or you know, it sounds a lot like fussed, so maybe plussed means something like fussed? So nonplussed = not fussed!! A series of inferences, some of which are more fair than others, but at least I can see how someone would get there.
I think I've posted this before, but I hate that I see so many actual writers (like journalists, authors, etc.) that use "bemused" as just a synonym for "amused." Wouldn't someone who has to use words for a living at least have a moment of, "hmmm, maybe I should look this word up because I'm suspicious that there could actually be a different meaning for a word when you change its letters!"
Post by: Kris on July 24, 2022, 04:15:16 PM
Ha! I have a supersmart friend. So smart, he got his MBA and his JD from two top universities in three years concurrently, by cobbling together his own program. That's some seriously creative DIY. He always thought this word meant the opposite until someone called him out early in his career. I always smile inwardly and think of him (and his wildly successful career) when I hear this word.Penultimate
Not only have I always had trouble with this word, but when I see others use it I always wonder if they really know the meaning of the word worth or using it incorrectly.
Interesting! I love this word and will use it in mundane situations like "I've taken the penultimate ice cream sandwich".
How are you hearing it used?
I will admit to believing that penultimate meant 'best' rather than 'second last' for a very long time, and probably used it that way a few times.
Yep, I would say that about 80% of the people I've heard use this term use it to mean "ultimate" as in "the best."
I had one acquaintance who used it all the time with a massive emphasis on the "PEN" part, as if that was what emphasized just how "ultimate" the object of her positive appraisal was.
Huh. This is so weird. I'm not sure I've ever heard it used incorrectly.
Speaking of thinking that a word means the opposite, "nonplussed" is one of the biggest examples I can think of it. Almost always when I hear it used in the wild, people mean "unaffected" or "underwhelmed."
I basically never hear it used right either, but I do have sympathy on this word for people that are intuiting or inferring the meaning of something they have just read or heard once or twice in their lives. Based on normal reasoning, the word should mean "not plussed" but what the hell is "plussed"? Sounds legitimately like a word that might mean something like bothered or you know, it sounds a lot like fussed, so maybe plussed means something like fussed? So nonplussed = not fussed!! A series of inferences, some of which are more fair than others, but at least I can see how someone would get there.
I think I've posted this before, but I hate that I see so many actual writers (like journalists, authors, etc.) that use "bemused" as just a synonym for "amused." Wouldn't someone who has to use words for a living at least have a moment of, "hmmm, maybe I should look this word up because I'm suspicious that there could actually be a different meaning for a word when you change its letters!"
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Post by: Metalcat on July 24, 2022, 04:58:20 PM
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Huh, I didn't know that one. I absolutely use it wrong.
However, M-W tells me that their meanings used to actually be reversed, with uninterested meaning unbiased and distinterested meaning lack of interest.
I wonder why they switched?
Post by: Kris on July 24, 2022, 05:47:38 PM
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Huh, I didn't know that one. I absolutely use it wrong.
However, M-W tells me that their meanings used to actually be reversed, with uninterested meaning unbiased and distinterested meaning lack of interest.
I wonder why they switched?
Sometimes I think it’s just giving in to incorrect usage. Like how definition 2 of “literally” is now “not literally but figuratively.”
So maybe someday, the definition of literally will be “not actually, but in a metaphorical sense.”
Post by: Metalcat on July 24, 2022, 06:53:56 PM
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Huh, I didn't know that one. I absolutely use it wrong.
However, M-W tells me that their meanings used to actually be reversed, with uninterested meaning unbiased and distinterested meaning lack of interest.
I wonder why they switched?
Sometimes I think it’s just giving in to incorrect usage. Like how definition 2 of “literally” is now “not literally but figuratively.”
So maybe someday, the definition of literally will be “not actually, but in a metaphorical sense.”
I wonder if they'll switch back with everyone using disinterested wrong.
Post by: sui generis on July 24, 2022, 07:01:41 PM
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Huh, I didn't know that one. I absolutely use it wrong.
However, M-W tells me that their meanings used to actually be reversed, with uninterested meaning unbiased and distinterested meaning lack of interest.
I wonder why they switched?
Sometimes I think it’s just giving in to incorrect usage. Like how definition 2 of “literally” is now “not literally but figuratively.”
So maybe someday, the definition of literally will be “not actually, but in a metaphorical sense.”
This seems similar to how irregardless used to not really be a word since it was just redundant and superfluous in light of "regardless" already meaning the same thing. But then everyone just gave up and are cool with "irregardless"?
Post by: SunnyDays on July 24, 2022, 08:14:03 PM
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Huh, I didn't know that one. I absolutely use it wrong.
However, M-W tells me that their meanings used to actually be reversed, with uninterested meaning unbiased and distinterested meaning lack of interest.
I wonder why they switched?
Sometimes I think it’s just giving in to incorrect usage. Like how definition 2 of “literally” is now “not literally but figuratively.”
So maybe someday, the definition of literally will be “not actually, but in a metaphorical sense.”
I wonder if they'll switch back with everyone using disinterested wrong.
I’ve literally never heard that.
Post by: Dicey on July 24, 2022, 08:52:48 PM
Who's cool with that word? Not this "everyone".
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Huh, I didn't know that one. I absolutely use it wrong.
However, M-W tells me that their meanings used to actually be reversed, with uninterested meaning unbiased and distinterested meaning lack of interest.
I wonder why they switched?
Sometimes I think it’s just giving in to incorrect usage. Like how definition 2 of “literally” is now “not literally but figuratively.”
So maybe someday, the definition of literally will be “not actually, but in a metaphorical sense.”
This seems similar to how irregardless used to not really be a word since it was just redundant and superfluous in light of "regardless" already meaning the same thing. But then everyone just gave up and are cool with "irregardless"?
Post by: sui generis on July 24, 2022, 08:57:25 PM
Who's cool with that word? Not this "everyone".
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Huh, I didn't know that one. I absolutely use it wrong.
However, M-W tells me that their meanings used to actually be reversed, with uninterested meaning unbiased and distinterested meaning lack of interest.
I wonder why they switched?
Sometimes I think it’s just giving in to incorrect usage. Like how definition 2 of “literally” is now “not literally but figuratively.”
So maybe someday, the definition of literally will be “not actually, but in a metaphorical sense.”
This seems similar to how irregardless used to not really be a word since it was just redundant and superfluous in light of "regardless" already meaning the same thing. But then everyone just gave up and are cool with "irregardless"?
Yeah, well I still harbor resentment against it (obviously), but I got the feeling I was losing that battle years ago.
Post by: Metalcat on July 25, 2022, 04:15:06 AM
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Huh, I didn't know that one. I absolutely use it wrong.
However, M-W tells me that their meanings used to actually be reversed, with uninterested meaning unbiased and distinterested meaning lack of interest.
I wonder why they switched?
Sometimes I think it’s just giving in to incorrect usage. Like how definition 2 of “literally” is now “not literally but figuratively.”
So maybe someday, the definition of literally will be “not actually, but in a metaphorical sense.”
I wonder if they'll switch back with everyone using disinterested wrong.
I’ve literally never heard that.
You've never heard someone use "disinterested" to mean that they aren't not interested? Wow. I hear and see it all the time.
Post by: merula on July 25, 2022, 07:35:07 AM
so.... did you mean that as you took the second to last sandwich? excitement to let others know there's one left? If so, I'll have to start doing that because it sounds fun.
Yes, exactly. The implication being "if you want one act fast". It is fun.
Speaking of thinking that a word means the opposite, "nonplussed" is one of the biggest examples I can think of it. Almost always when I hear it used in the wild, people mean "unaffected" or "underwhelmed."
Same thing with the word peruse. So many people think it means to quickly review vs. it’s actual meaning of very thoroughly or carefully.
Sometimes I think it’s just giving in to incorrect usage. Like how definition 2 of “literally” is now “not literally but figuratively.”
Fun fact! Nonplussed, peruse and literally are all contronyms, in that their accepted meanings include opposites. Nonplussed can mean either puzzled or unbothered (although that's primarily a US vs UK difference), peruse can mean either read thoroughly or skim, and literally either means precisely or figuratively.
No one's wrong, words are fun.
Post by: SunnyDays on July 25, 2022, 12:41:27 PM
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Huh, I didn't know that one. I absolutely use it wrong.
However, M-W tells me that their meanings used to actually be reversed, with uninterested meaning unbiased and distinterested meaning lack of interest.
I wonder why they switched?
Sometimes I think it’s just giving in to incorrect usage. Like how definition 2 of “literally” is now “not literally but figuratively.”
So maybe someday, the definition of literally will be “not actually, but in a metaphorical sense.”
I wonder if they'll switch back with everyone using disinterested wrong.
I’ve literally never heard that.
You've never heard someone use "disinterested" to mean that they aren't not interested? Wow. I hear and see it all the time.
No, I meant that I’ve never heard that “literally” now means “figuratively.”
Post by: Kris on July 25, 2022, 12:49:46 PM
Yeah, I see that a ton, too.
Also, lately people seem to almost exclusively use “disinterested” when they mean “uninterested.”
Huh, I didn't know that one. I absolutely use it wrong.
However, M-W tells me that their meanings used to actually be reversed, with uninterested meaning unbiased and distinterested meaning lack of interest.
I wonder why they switched?
Sometimes I think it’s just giving in to incorrect usage. Like how definition 2 of “literally” is now “not literally but figuratively.”
So maybe someday, the definition of literally will be “not actually, but in a metaphorical sense.”
I wonder if they'll switch back with everyone using disinterested wrong.
I’ve literally never heard that.
You've never heard someone use "disinterested" to mean that they aren't not interested? Wow. I hear and see it all the time.
No, I meant that I’ve never heard that “literally” now means “figuratively.”
See definition 2.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally
Post by: Josiecat22222 on August 12, 2022, 11:32:54 AM
"constitutional crisis"
"existential crisis"
"rule of law"
"witch hunt"
"hoax"
ad infinitum.....
Not just sick of the words, sick of the drama and the lies, and the pathological narcissism which keeps these phrases on the top of the news cycle.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on August 12, 2022, 03:06:31 PM
Post by: Dicey on August 12, 2022, 03:09:14 PM
Post by: FIRE Artist on August 12, 2022, 03:49:29 PM
Memory does work that way. Sorry, but it is highly unlikely your diapered butt toddler is going to remember splashing in the rain with dad, and sure as heck isn’t life/personality defining.
Post by: Metalcat on August 12, 2022, 05:48:29 PM
I am over “Core memory created”.
Memory does work that way. Sorry, but it is highly unlikely your diapered butt toddler is going to remember splashing in the rain with dad, and sure as heck isn’t life/personality defining.
I've never heard this. What is it *supposed* to mean?
From your example, is this something parents are jokingly saying about their children's experiences or is it being said in earnest?
Post by: getsorted on August 12, 2022, 06:12:58 PM
I am over “Core memory created”.
Memory does work that way. Sorry, but it is highly unlikely your diapered butt toddler is going to remember splashing in the rain with dad, and sure as heck isn’t life/personality defining.
I've never heard this. What is it *supposed* to mean?
From your example, is this something parents are jokingly saying about their children's experiences or is it being said in earnest?
It's a reference to the Pixar film, "Inside Out." Core memories are memories that the main character builds her identity around. In the beginning of the movie, these are extra-happy memories; over the course of the film she learns that they have sadness to them too, and that's okay.
Whenever she makes one, a giant marble run inside her brain spits out a golden ball and a voice says, "Core memory created."
Post by: Metalcat on August 12, 2022, 06:16:12 PM
I am over “Core memory created”.
Memory does work that way. Sorry, but it is highly unlikely your diapered butt toddler is going to remember splashing in the rain with dad, and sure as heck isn’t life/personality defining.
I've never heard this. What is it *supposed* to mean?
From your example, is this something parents are jokingly saying about their children's experiences or is it being said in earnest?
It's a reference to the Pixar film, "Inside Out." Core memories are memories that the main character builds her identity around. In the beginning of the movie, these are extra-happy memories; over the course of the film she learns that they have sadness to them too, and that's okay.
Whenever she makes one, a giant marble run inside her brain spits out a golden ball and a voice says, "Core memory created."
Oooooohhhhh...
Post by: FIRE Artist on August 12, 2022, 07:33:20 PM
I am over “Core memory created”.
Memory does work that way. Sorry, but it is highly unlikely your diapered butt toddler is going to remember splashing in the rain with dad, and sure as heck isn’t life/personality defining.
I've never heard this. What is it *supposed* to mean?
From your example, is this something parents are jokingly saying about their children's experiences or is it being said in earnest?
TicTokers are saying it in earnest and trying to outdo each other with “core memory” challenges for their kids, hence the flood of toddlers in the rain. It has also spread to the child free population as well, hearing someone describe spending time with their dog as “core memory created” is actually what caused me to add this - not sure if they meant core memory for themselves or their dog!
Yes to the Inside Out reference.
Post by: getsorted on August 12, 2022, 08:09:04 PM
I am over “Core memory created”.
Memory does work that way. Sorry, but it is highly unlikely your diapered butt toddler is going to remember splashing in the rain with dad, and sure as heck isn’t life/personality defining.
I've never heard this. What is it *supposed* to mean?
From your example, is this something parents are jokingly saying about their children's experiences or is it being said in earnest?
TicTokers are saying it in earnest and trying to outdo each other with “core memory” challenges for their kids, hence the flood of toddlers in the rain. It has also spread to the child free population as well, hearing someone describe spending time with their dog as “core memory created” is actually what caused me to add this - not sure if they meant core memory for themselves or their dog!
Yes to the Inside Out reference.
I didn't know about the TikTok challenge but of course it's a TikTok challenge. 🙄 I'm dying about the dog! I love my dog but I have never asked myself whether I'm giving her a life of beautiful memories. 😂 I don't even know what that would be for her. Probably bacon and a nap.
Post by: Morning Glory on August 12, 2022, 08:41:31 PM
I am over “Core memory created”.It does for my youngest. If he likes playing in the rain with dad then he will not understand why dad doesn't want to come play with him the next time it rains, and every subsequent time. It has to be dad, or there will be meltdowns.
Memory does work that way. Sorry, but it is highly unlikely your diapered butt toddler is going to remember splashing in the rain with dad, and sure as heck isn’t life/personality defining.
Post by: Metalcat on August 13, 2022, 05:42:43 AM
I am over “Core memory created”.
Memory does work that way. Sorry, but it is highly unlikely your diapered butt toddler is going to remember splashing in the rain with dad, and sure as heck isn’t life/personality defining.
I've never heard this. What is it *supposed* to mean?
From your example, is this something parents are jokingly saying about their children's experiences or is it being said in earnest?
TicTokers are saying it in earnest and trying to outdo each other with “core memory” challenges for their kids, hence the flood of toddlers in the rain. It has also spread to the child free population as well, hearing someone describe spending time with their dog as “core memory created” is actually what caused me to add this - not sure if they meant core memory for themselves or their dog!
Yes to the Inside Out reference.
This makes sense why I have never heard it then. Most of my friends kids aren't "Inside Out" age, and I don't use much social media.
Post by: Dicey on August 13, 2022, 06:19:24 AM
Same.I am over “Core memory created”.
Memory does work that way. Sorry, but it is highly unlikely your diapered butt toddler is going to remember splashing in the rain with dad, and sure as heck isn’t life/personality defining.
I've never heard this. What is it *supposed* to mean?
From your example, is this something parents are jokingly saying about their children's experiences or is it being said in earnest?
TicTokers are saying it in earnest and trying to outdo each other with “core memory” challenges for their kids, hence the flood of toddlers in the rain. It has also spread to the child free population as well, hearing someone describe spending time with their dog as “core memory created” is actually what caused me to add this - not sure if they meant core memory for themselves or their dog!
Yes to the Inside Out reference.
This makes sense why I have never heard it then. Most of my friends kids aren't "Inside Out" age, and I don't use much social media.
I have zero faith that "creating core memories" in this context is anything but a commercial endeavor. Must take child to MickeyD's, Disneyland, etc, or they won't have strong "core memories" which in turn proves you're a bad parent.
Blech.
Post by: nereo on August 13, 2022, 10:45:43 AM
Example:
“What are your deliverables this week, Ted?”
“Well, I’ll finish that contract by Thursday and then pass it on to legal”.
Post by: RWD on August 13, 2022, 11:59:39 AM
Post by: nereo on August 14, 2022, 04:26:35 AM
"Deliverables" makes sense in the context of contracts (what needs to be delivered to fulfill the contract). Pretty silly to apply to individuals' work.
Agreed. I first saw the term in grant contracts, but then it’s started to be used on a more individual level
Post by: Metalcat on August 14, 2022, 06:18:13 AM
"Deliverables" makes sense in the context of contracts (what needs to be delivered to fulfill the contract). Pretty silly to apply to individuals' work.
Agreed. I first saw the term in grant contracts, but then it’s started to be used on a more individual level
I'm pretty sure "deliverology" was already mentioned in this thread a few years ago, but I thought it was fitting to throw in here.
Post by: BlueHouse on August 16, 2022, 08:54:19 AM
Eating food is a human necessity. I find it annoying that our culture has convinced so many people that they have to have a "Passion" for something, and so they create it around something so mundane. Yes, we can all enjoy food and appreciate the effort that goes into a carefully crafted meal, but I find it hard to believe that SO MANY of us really think we're better at "fooding" than the rest of us. Most of the people I hear it from aren't the ones who search for fresh ingredients and create meals from them. They just want an excuse to go out to eat. And they buy Fresh Express or Blue Apron at home.
I'd prefer any of the following:
I'm a hedonist and I love nice things.
I'm an air snob. I travel the world in search of the clearest air available. You should smell the air on top of Kilimanjaro on a September morning!
I love shopping for useless items in my spare time.
I buy luxury cars and then resell them to buy a different car a year later. I'm always on a quest to find the car that makes me feel good about myself.
I'm hoping that money can buy enough material things to fill the empty void in my soul, so I buy a lot of stuff at the mall.
I collect donuts.
My passion is scrolling thru instagram watching other people do cool things.
My hobby is washing and drying my hair and painting it strange colors.
Post by: nereo on August 16, 2022, 08:57:26 AM
Post by: getsorted on August 16, 2022, 08:59:33 AM
My passion is scrolling thru instagram watching other people do cool things.
I should put this in my online dating profile. (Kidding, but only because I don't have an online dating profile).
Post by: sui generis on August 16, 2022, 09:22:50 AM
I'm also weirdly cranky about "Would love" or "would love this" as a complete sentence. It seems important to leave off the "I" in the front now to achieve the right inflection or something? At first it felt like an interesting little variation to throw out, but now it's the only way and so cranky old me doesn't find it so cute anymore.
Post by: Taran Wanderer on August 16, 2022, 12:33:39 PM
Post by: Dicey on August 16, 2022, 12:47:24 PM
I’m sick of, “We’re so blessed to have/be/experience…” No, a god didn’t bless you. Maybe you’re lucky. Maybe you worked really hard. Maybe something else. But in the end, you or the people around you or in some cases being on the fortunate side of the cosmic flip of the coin created your situation. I’m good with ‘fortunate’ or ‘grateful’ or ‘gratitude’ (sort of) but the whole ‘blessed’ thing really rubs me the wrong way… like anyone who’s having a hard time just sadly wasn’t ‘blessed’.DH and look at Real Estate listings all the time. Seeing those "Blessed" signs is a complete turn-off. Those are probably the same people whose outgoing message reminds all and sundry to have a "blessed day". Ugh.
Post by: nereo on August 16, 2022, 05:31:13 PM
I’m sick of, “We’re so blessed to have/be/experience…” No, a god didn’t bless you. Maybe you’re lucky. Maybe you worked really hard. Maybe something else. But in the end, you or the people around you or in some cases being on the fortunate side of the cosmic flip of the coin created your situation. I’m good with ‘fortunate’ or ‘grateful’ or ‘gratitude’ (sort of) but the whole ‘blessed’ thing really rubs me the wrong way… like anyone who’s having a hard time just sadly wasn’t ‘blessed’.DH and look at Real Estate listings all the time. Seeing those "Blessed" signs is a complete turn-off. Those are probably the same people whose outgoing message reminds all and sundry to have a "blessed day". Ugh.
That child in me want to respond: “thanks, but I didn’t sneeze” anytime someone tells me to have a blessed day (or similar).
Post by: BlueHouse on August 16, 2022, 07:23:11 PM
I’m sick of, “We’re so blessed to have/be/experience…” No, a god didn’t bless you. Maybe you’re lucky. Maybe you worked really hard. Maybe something else. But in the end, you or the people around you or in some cases being on the fortunate side of the cosmic flip of the coin created your situation. I’m good with ‘fortunate’ or ‘grateful’ or ‘gratitude’ (sort of) but the whole ‘blessed’ thing really rubs me the wrong way… like anyone who’s having a hard time just sadly wasn’t ‘blessed’.DH and look at Real Estate listings all the time. Seeing those "Blessed" signs is a complete turn-off. Those are probably the same people whose outgoing message reminds all and sundry to have a "blessed day". Ugh.
That child in me want to respond: “thanks, but I didn’t sneeze” anytime someone tells me to have a blessed day (or similar).
Ha! A local reporter went on the news and talked about how the sole survivor from the Lightening strike (Washington DC, across from the White House) had received a blessing from God. A true miracle. Her heart actually stopped twice and she was resuscitated twice by nurses and then EMTs. It's not just the word in this case, but I'm pretty sure God had just tried to kill this person (3 others died) and the miracle of science and medicine saved her life!
Post by: Dollar Slice on August 16, 2022, 07:48:50 PM
It's not just the word in this case, but I'm pretty sure God had just tried to kill this person (3 others died) and the miracle of science and medicine saved her life!
Seriously. God must be up there like "How the Hell can I get it through these people's thick skulls that they fucked up?? I keep sending them these terrible warnings and they're all 'Oh thank you! God has blessed me with more hardship to make me stronger'."
Post by: Dicey on August 16, 2022, 11:22:21 PM
Post by: Dancin'Dog on August 22, 2022, 07:23:42 AM
Post by: zolotiyeruki on August 22, 2022, 07:43:15 AM
"Blessed" is a right-wing Christian white national code word to let everyone know that they're better than you.As someone who is a conservative Christian, I feel I have to push back a bit on this. At least in my brand of Christianity, blessings are gifts from God, frequently (but not always!) connected to someone's good behavior. My personal prosperity, or lack thereof, is not a reliable indicator of personal righteousness. I have some devout friends who are "salt of the earth" types, absolutely lovely people, who seem to attract misfortune like a magnet.
Post by: Davnasty on August 22, 2022, 08:10:08 AM
"Blessed" is a right-wing Christian white national code word to let everyone know that they're better than you.
I'll push back on this too. Maybe some people use it this way but I've heard different people use it different ways.
I think assuming that certain words are code or using someone's language to pigeonhole them into a group is harmful. Even if you're right a lot of the time, sometimes people just talk the way they talk because of where they live and the people around them.
Post by: BlueHouse on August 22, 2022, 07:03:30 PM
"Blessed" is a right-wing Christian white national code word to let everyone know that they're better than you.
I thought this was an Islam saying.
Post by: Metalcat on August 22, 2022, 07:38:55 PM
"Blessed" is a right-wing Christian white national code word to let everyone know that they're better than you.
I thought this was an Islam saying.
Christianity predates Islam by many, many years, and "blessed" features heavily in Christianity hisrorically. Islam borrows a lot from Christianity. But "blessed" predates them both, and I'm pretty sure comes from some very dead language's word for blood from pagan rituals of dribbling blood on sacred things.
Post by: Dancin'Dog on September 04, 2022, 04:15:22 PM
"Blessed" is a right-wing Christian white national code word to let everyone know that they're better than you.As someone who is a conservative Christian, I feel I have to push back a bit on this. At least in my brand of Christianity, blessings are gifts from God, frequently (but not always!) connected to someone's good behavior. My personal prosperity, or lack thereof, is not a reliable indicator of personal righteousness. I have some devout friends who are "salt of the earth" types, absolutely lovely people, who seem to attract misfortune like a magnet.
You're right. I should have said that it "feels like" rather than it "is".
The "better than" I was referring to wasn't in a financial sense, but rather than "my views" are better than yours sense. Also, in the sense that "we're going to heaven" because our beliefs are right and everyone else's are wrong.
Post by: Morning Glory on September 04, 2022, 04:40:04 PM
"Blessed" is a right-wing Christian white national code word to let everyone know that they're better than you.As someone who is a conservative Christian, I feel I have to push back a bit on this. At least in my brand of Christianity, blessings are gifts from God, frequently (but not always!) connected to someone's good behavior. My personal prosperity, or lack thereof, is not a reliable indicator of personal righteousness. I have some devout friends who are "salt of the earth" types, absolutely lovely people, who seem to attract misfortune like a magnet.
You're right. I should have said that it "feels like" rather than it "is".
The "better than" I was referring to wasn't in a financial sense, but rather than "my views" are better than yours sense. Also, in the sense that "we're going to heaven" because our beliefs are right and everyone else's are wrong.
Blessing and cursing things/people/animals are common in all cultures, but I'll agree it's grating when it's overused as a virtue signal. "Bless you" for a sneeze isn't really different than "dammit" for a stubbed toe though.
I saw a house on zillow with a "blessed" wall art sign right above a kitchen pass through, which might have been for efficiency in the blessing of food, which is practiced in many religions. More original than "live laugh love", I guess.
Today we looked at one with a sign that said "kitchen" in the kitchen. Bless their hearts.
Post by: MissNancyPryor on December 17, 2022, 07:10:17 PM
The Halloween Reese's peanut butter cups ad and now the hideous Old Navy ad for Christmas have put me over the edge.
Overthinking it: what transgression, exactly, would I be apologizing for and why, exactly, am I asserting that things are so awesome I shall not offer any apology?
This is the level of stupid that rattles in my head every time it comes up and I am sure I have risked brain cell death by trying to untie such philosophical knots.
"I am just living my life out loud and stuffing my face with mass produced candy and buying cheap clothes! Deal with it, world! Not sorry!" As if anyone gave a good hot damn about such meaningless and ordinary indulgences.
See? They are just stupid commercials and I am tipped over by the lot of it.
Post by: nereo on January 18, 2023, 10:38:27 AM
The word analysis suggests quantitative methods; a way that you can compare things with minimal bias. So "Vibe analysis" is essentially an oxymoron. It's your feelings and opinions.
Post by: Dicey on January 18, 2023, 11:10:45 AM
Post by: Miss Piggy on January 18, 2023, 11:51:58 AM
"vibe analysis" [used in place of a "gut feeling", often in reference to whether an asset is over/under valued]
The word analysis suggests quantitative methods; a way that you can compare things with minimal bias. So "Vibe analysis" is essentially an oxymoron. It's your feelings and opinions.
So you don't foresee any new degree programs or career paths in "Vibe Analytics"? That's disappointing.
Post by: Paul der Krake on January 18, 2023, 11:58:18 AM
"vibe analysis" [used in place of a "gut feeling", often in reference to whether an asset is over/under valued]Was this in reaction to my usage in the Microsoft thread?
The word analysis suggests quantitative methods; a way that you can compare things with minimal bias. So "Vibe analysis" is essentially an oxymoron. It's your feelings and opinions.
I'm using it ironically, which, I hope, is how everyone uses it.
Post by: nereo on January 18, 2023, 12:09:30 PM
"vibe analysis" [used in place of a "gut feeling", often in reference to whether an asset is over/under valued]Was this in reaction to my usage in the Microsoft thread?
The word analysis suggests quantitative methods; a way that you can compare things with minimal bias. So "Vibe analysis" is essentially an oxymoron. It's your feelings and opinions.
I'm using it ironically, which, I hope, is how everyone uses it.
No, I had not seen the Microsoft thread. I’ve come across the term a few times though, and usually not used ironically.
Post by: ixtap on January 18, 2023, 12:20:58 PM
"vibe analysis" [used in place of a "gut feeling", often in reference to whether an asset is over/under valued]
The word analysis suggests quantitative methods; a way that you can compare things with minimal bias. So "Vibe analysis" is essentially an oxymoron. It's your feelings and opinions.
Just wait until you hear about literary analysis!
Post by: GuitarStv on January 18, 2023, 02:05:45 PM
"vibe analysis" [used in place of a "gut feeling", often in reference to whether an asset is over/under valued]
The word analysis suggests quantitative methods; a way that you can compare things with minimal bias. So "Vibe analysis" is essentially an oxymoron. It's your feelings and opinions.
So you don't foresee any new degree programs or career paths in "Vibe Analytics"? That's disappointing.
Vibalytics seems at least as valid as 'Travel and Tourism' degrees.
Post by: Morning Glory on January 18, 2023, 02:32:05 PM
"vibe analysis" [used in place of a "gut feeling", often in reference to whether an asset is over/under valued]
The word analysis suggests quantitative methods; a way that you can compare things with minimal bias. So "Vibe analysis" is essentially an oxymoron. It's your feelings and opinions.
So you don't foresee any new degree programs or career paths in "Vibe Analytics"? That's disappointing.
Vibalytics seems at least as valid as 'Travel and Tourism' degrees.
Vibalytics is a subdiscipline of Vibeonomics, which is itself part of the larger Vibeology department. You can study it at any for-profit vibe-versity. Applied Vibeonomics, another subdiscipline, is used to improve the manufacture and distribution of vibrators and other vibe-enhancing devices.
Glad this thread is back. Where else would I complain about teachers in yoga videos saying "inhale in" and "exhale out"? Is there another place to inhale and exhale to?
Post by: nereo on January 18, 2023, 03:03:04 PM
Glad this thread is back. Where else would I complain about teachers in yoga videos saying "inhale in" and "exhale out"? Is there another place to inhale and exhale to?
Yes, but it's considered impolite (and potentially painful) in most circumstances
Post by: ATtiny85 on January 18, 2023, 04:10:33 PM
Glad this thread is back. Where else would I complain about teachers in yoga videos saying "inhale in" and "exhale out"? Is there another place to inhale and exhale to?
Yes, but it's considered impolite (and potentially painful) in most circumstances
That was a good analysis of the question. I tried to come up with an analogy, butt failed.
Post by: Morning Glory on January 18, 2023, 04:56:58 PM
Glad this thread is back. Where else would I complain about teachers in yoga videos saying "inhale in" and "exhale out"? Is there another place to inhale and exhale to?
Yes, but it's considered impolite (and potentially painful) in most circumstances
That was a good analysis of the question. I tried to come up with an analogy, butt failed.
Looks like it fell out of fashion in the 1800s:
https://bcmj.org/special-feature/special-feature-tobacco-smoke-enemas#:~:text=In%201811%2C%20English%20scientist%20Ben,purchased%20in%20London%27s%20secondhand%20stores.
"In 1811, English scientist Ben Brodie discovered that nicotine was toxic to the heart, and it soon became unfashionable to prescribe tobacco smoke enemas. These kits, along with lancets and phlebotomes, were soon easily purchased in London’s secondhand stores."
Post by: nereo on January 18, 2023, 04:59:08 PM
Post by: GuitarStv on January 18, 2023, 05:22:52 PM
I never know what I’m going to learn on any given day!
Quote
There are a number of scattered references to ancient and medieval flatulists, who could produce various rhythms and pitches with their intestinal wind. Saint Augustine in City of God (De Civitate Dei) (14.24) mentions some performers who did have "such command of their bowels, that they can break wind continuously at will, so as to produce the effect of singing." Juan Luis Vives, in his 1522 commentary to Augustine's work, testifies to having himself witnessed such a feat, a remark referenced by Michel de Montaigne in an essay.
The professional farters of medieval Ireland were called braigetoír. They are listed together with other performers and musicians in the 12th century Tech Midchúarda, a diagram of the banqueting hall of Tara. As entertainers, these braigetoír ranked at the lower end of a scale headed by bards, fili, and harpers.
An entry in the 13th-century English Liber Feodorum or Book of Fees lists one Roland the Farter, who held Hemingstone manor in the county of Suffolk, for which he was obliged to perform "Unum saltum et siffletum et unum bombulum" (one jump and whistle and one fart) annually at the court of King Henry II every Christmas. The Activa Vita character in the 14th century allegorical poem Piers Plowman appears to number farting among the abilities desirable in a good entertainer, saying: "As for me, I can neither drum nor trumpet, nor tell jokes, nor fart amusingly at parties, nor play the harp."
In Japan, during the Edo period, flatulists were known as "heppiri otoko" (放屁男), lit. "farting men."[5] The term He-gassen (屁合戦), "farting competitions", is applied to Edo-period art scrolls depicting flatulence.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatulist (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatulist)
The world where more people are aware of this ancient and hallowed profession is a place I'd like to live.
Post by: simonsez on January 31, 2023, 09:28:34 AM
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
Post by: sui generis on January 31, 2023, 12:17:20 PM
< and > used incorrectly. I've seen it more frequently lately, including on this forum.
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
How are people using them wrong - just backwards, or in some other creative way?
The thing that is bothering me lately isn't exactly a word or phrase, it's just the elimination of the word "I" (or I'd or I'm) in written speech. I'm really probably just being a crotchedy old lady about it, but there seems to be something more than just the expediency of eliminating one whole letter and a space from a sentence, something I can't put my finger on, so I guess it's annoying me because I feel like there's something about it that I don't get.
There are all kinds of examples, but the most frequent is in my Buy Nothing group, where no one ever responds to a post saying "I'd love this", it's always "Would love this" which is actually longer to type than the former! But somehow it's just not the done thing.
Post by: RWD on January 31, 2023, 12:27:41 PM
< and > used incorrectly. I've seen it more frequently lately, including on this forum.
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
How are people using them wrong - just backwards, or in some other creative way?
The thing that is bothering me lately isn't exactly a word or phrase, it's just the elimination of the word "I" (or I'd or I'm) in written speech. I'm really probably just being a crotchedy old lady about it, but there seems to be something more than just the expediency of eliminating one whole letter and a space from a sentence, something I can't put my finger on, so I guess it's annoying me because I feel like there's something about it that I don't get.
There are all kinds of examples, but the most frequent is in my Buy Nothing group, where no one ever responds to a post saying "I'd love this", it's always "Would love this" which is actually longer to type than the former! But somehow it's just not the done thing.
Definitely guilty of this. ;)
Post by: Metalcat on January 31, 2023, 01:00:15 PM
< and > used incorrectly. I've seen it more frequently lately, including on this forum.
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
How are people using them wrong - just backwards, or in some other creative way?
The thing that is bothering me lately isn't exactly a word or phrase, it's just the elimination of the word "I" (or I'd or I'm) in written speech. I'm really probably just being a crotchedy old lady about it, but there seems to be something more than just the expediency of eliminating one whole letter and a space from a sentence, something I can't put my finger on, so I guess it's annoying me because I feel like there's something about it that I don't get.
There are all kinds of examples, but the most frequent is in my Buy Nothing group, where no one ever responds to a post saying "I'd love this", it's always "Would love this" which is actually longer to type than the former! But somehow it's just not the done thing.
This is more common among people who write like they speak and don't generally read a lot. It's very common in spoken English to drop the "I" from a statement, so people who write to mimic spoken language will often do this.
People who are more readers/formal writers are more likely to write like writers, and will find this odd.
Post by: Kris on January 31, 2023, 05:45:57 PM
< and > used incorrectly. I've seen it more frequently lately, including on this forum.
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
How are people using them wrong - just backwards, or in some other creative way?
The thing that is bothering me lately isn't exactly a word or phrase, it's just the elimination of the word "I" (or I'd or I'm) in written speech. I'm really probably just being a crotchedy old lady about it, but there seems to be something more than just the expediency of eliminating one whole letter and a space from a sentence, something I can't put my finger on, so I guess it's annoying me because I feel like there's something about it that I don't get.
There are all kinds of examples, but the most frequent is in my Buy Nothing group, where no one ever responds to a post saying "I'd love this", it's always "Would love this" which is actually longer to type than the former! But somehow it's just not the done thing.
This is more common among people who write like they speak and don't generally read a lot. It's very common in spoken English to drop the "I" from a statement, so people who write to mimic spoken language will often do this.
People who are more readers/formal writers are more likely to write like writers, and will find this odd.
Yep. It’s how most of my extended family writes.
Post by: ATtiny85 on February 01, 2023, 06:47:30 AM
< and > used incorrectly. I've seen it more frequently lately, including on this forum.
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
Very strange.
I did see in a graphic just this morning that was a little weird. It was showing the distribution of ages in our workforce. It was a table.
Age Diversity <30 30-50 50<
I found the bolded part to sort of be a weird way to mean greater than 50. |
Post by: GuitarStv on February 01, 2023, 06:58:06 AM
< and > used incorrectly. I've seen it more frequently lately, including on this forum.
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
Very strange.
I did see in a graphic just this morning that was a little weird. It was showing the distribution of ages in our workforce. It was a table.
Age Diversity <30 30-50 50<
2022 value xx% xx% xx%
I found the bolded part to sort of be a weird way to mean greater than 50.
50< == >50
not sure I understand the problem.
Post by: Morning Glory on February 01, 2023, 07:13:51 AM
< and > used incorrectly. I've seen it more frequently lately, including on this forum.
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
Very strange.
I did see in a graphic just this morning that was a little weird. It was showing the distribution of ages in our workforce. It was a table.
Age Diversity <30 30-50 50<
2022 value xx% xx% xx%
I found the bolded part to sort of be a weird way to mean greater than 50.
50< == >50
not sure I understand the problem.
It is technically correct. I wonder if their > key got stuck and they needed a workaround.
Post by: Freedomin5 on February 01, 2023, 07:18:56 AM
< and > used incorrectly. I've seen it more frequently lately, including on this forum.
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
Very strange.
I did see in a graphic just this morning that was a little weird. It was showing the distribution of ages in our workforce. It was a table.
Age Diversity <30 30-50 50<
2022 value xx% xx% xx%
I found the bolded part to sort of be a weird way to mean greater than 50.
That is an awkward way of writing “greater than 50”. I read “<30” as “less than 30”, and “50<“ as “50 is less than…”
Less than WHAT? Don’t leave me hanging!
Post by: GuitarStv on February 01, 2023, 09:23:09 AM
< and > used incorrectly. I've seen it more frequently lately, including on this forum.
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
Very strange.
I did see in a graphic just this morning that was a little weird. It was showing the distribution of ages in our workforce. It was a table.
Age Diversity <30 30-50 50<
2022 value xx% xx% xx%
I found the bolded part to sort of be a weird way to mean greater than 50.
That is an awkward way of writing “greater than 50”. I read “<30” as “less than 30”, and “50<“ as “50 is less than…”
Less than WHAT? Don’t leave me hanging!
Ah, I get it now.
I have always just viewed > or < as a symbol. Pacman eats the bigger number. I don't translate it into 'is greater than' or 'is less than' in my mind at all.
Post by: simonsez on February 01, 2023, 10:14:03 AM
...which is totally fine and mathematically/logically correct.< and > used incorrectly. I've seen it more frequently lately, including on this forum.
If a high enough % of the population doesn't understand it, maybe we should just use "greater than" or "less than" explicitly to reduce ambiguity.
Very strange.
I did see in a graphic just this morning that was a little weird. It was showing the distribution of ages in our workforce. It was a table.
Age Diversity <30 30-50 50<
2022 value xx% xx% xx%
I found the bolded part to sort of be a weird way to mean greater than 50.
That is an awkward way of writing “greater than 50”. I read “<30” as “less than 30”, and “50<“ as “50 is less than…”
Less than WHAT? Don’t leave me hanging!
Ah, I get it now.
I have always just viewed > or < as a symbol. Pacman eats the bigger number. I don't translate it into 'is greater than' or 'is less than' in my mind at all.
I'm talking about context where someone uses the relation erroneously.
E.g. "I've been going to the gym >5 times a week" when from the context you can tell they mean "I've been going to the gym less than five times a week."
Post by: MoseyingAlong on February 02, 2023, 10:49:30 PM
......
The thing that is bothering me lately isn't exactly a word or phrase, it's just the elimination of the word "I" (or I'd or I'm) in written speech. I'm really probably just being a crotchedy old lady about it, but there seems to be something more than just the expediency of eliminating one whole letter and a space from a sentence, something I can't put my finger on, so I guess it's annoying me because I feel like there's something about it that I don't get.
There are all kinds of examples, but the most frequent is in my Buy Nothing group, where no one ever responds to a post saying "I'd love this", it's always "Would love this" which is actually longer to type than the former! But somehow it's just not the done thing.
Sometimes I write a message and then spend effort trying to reduce the amount of I's. Otherwise it seems overly self-involved. I think, I want, I suggest, I wish, etc., etc., etc. So I'll go back and edit to Maybe we, what about, wouldn't it be nice if...
To my ear, "would love this" seems more about the offer and less demanding than "I'd love this." It's weird what we hear.
Post by: Morning Glory on February 03, 2023, 06:38:00 AM
......
The thing that is bothering me lately isn't exactly a word or phrase, it's just the elimination of the word "I" (or I'd or I'm) in written speech. I'm really probably just being a crotchedy old lady about it, but there seems to be something more than just the expediency of eliminating one whole letter and a space from a sentence, something I can't put my finger on, so I guess it's annoying me because I feel like there's something about it that I don't get.
There are all kinds of examples, but the most frequent is in my Buy Nothing group, where no one ever responds to a post saying "I'd love this", it's always "Would love this" which is actually longer to type than the former! But somehow it's just not the done thing.
Sometimes I write a message and then spend effort trying to reduce the amount of I's. Otherwise it seems overly self-involved. I think, I want, I suggest, I wish, etc., etc., etc. So I'll go back and edit to Maybe we, what about, wouldn't it be nice if...
To my ear, "would love this" seems more about the offer and less demanding than "I'd love this." It's weird what we hear.
I think it's because it's hard to get the apostrophes right when typing on the phone. Much easier to type "wo" and select "would " than flip the keyboard twice to type "I'd"
Post by: Dicey on February 03, 2023, 08:01:41 AM
I see what you did there, and tend to do the same, for the same reason.
......
The thing that is bothering me lately isn't exactly a word or phrase, it's just the elimination of the word "I" (or I'd or I'm) in written speech. I'm really probably just being a crotchedy old lady about it, but there seems to be something more than just the expediency of eliminating one whole letter and a space from a sentence, something I can't put my finger on, so I guess it's annoying me because I feel like there's something about it that I don't get.
There are all kinds of examples, but the most frequent is in my Buy Nothing group, where no one ever responds to a post saying "I'd love this", it's always "Would love this" which is actually longer to type than the former! But somehow it's just not the done thing.
Sometimes I write a message and then spend effort trying to reduce the amount of I's. Otherwise it seems overly self-involved. I think, I want, I suggest, I wish, etc., etc., etc. So I'll go back and edit to Maybe we, what about, wouldn't it be nice if...
To my ear, "would love this" seems more about the offer and less demanding than "I'd love this." It's weird what we hear.
Post by: RainyDay on February 03, 2023, 08:01:52 AM
Quote
There are a number of scattered references to ancient and medieval flatulists, who could produce various rhythms and pitches with their intestinal wind. Saint Augustine in City of God (De Civitate Dei) (14.24) mentions some performers who did have "such command of their bowels, that they can break wind continuously at will, so as to produce the effect of singing." Juan Luis Vives, in his 1522 commentary to Augustine's work, testifies to having himself witnessed such a feat, a remark referenced by Michel de Montaigne in an essay.
The professional farters of medieval Ireland were called braigetoír. They are listed together with other performers and musicians in the 12th century Tech Midchúarda, a diagram of the banqueting hall of Tara. As entertainers, these braigetoír ranked at the lower end of a scale headed by bards, fili, and harpers.
An entry in the 13th-century English Liber Feodorum or Book of Fees lists one Roland the Farter, who held Hemingstone manor in the county of Suffolk, for which he was obliged to perform "Unum saltum et siffletum et unum bombulum" (one jump and whistle and one fart) annually at the court of King Henry II every Christmas. The Activa Vita character in the 14th century allegorical poem Piers Plowman appears to number farting among the abilities desirable in a good entertainer, saying: "As for me, I can neither drum nor trumpet, nor tell jokes, nor fart amusingly at parties, nor play the harp."
In Japan, during the Edo period, flatulists were known as "heppiri otoko" (放屁男), lit. "farting men."[5] The term He-gassen (屁合戦), "farting competitions", is applied to Edo-period art scrolls depicting flatulence.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatulist (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatulist)
The world where more people are aware of this ancient and hallowed profession is a place I'd like to live.
[/quote]
Only if you're living upwind of them!
Post by: iris lily on February 04, 2023, 07:04:02 PM
My small gripe is: “invite” when people use that word as a noun, abbreviating “invitation.” I find it mildly annoying.
My bigger gripe is that no one seems to use the word “fewer “ in appropriate places any more. This may have already been addressed in the many posts on this thread. I hear it all the time:
My dog picked up less sticks today than during our last walk.
I had less colds this year than last year.
My dad gave me less quarters for laundry than what I needed.
These are all wrong. Use “fewer” for nouns that are Countable.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 04, 2023, 07:53:18 PM
I have a big gripe and a takes forever every year‘s giant April is chests small gripe.
My small gripe is: “invite” when people use that word as a noun, abbreviating “invitation.” I find it mildly annoying.
My bigger gripe is that no one seems to use the word “fewer “ in appropriate places any more. This may have already been addressed in the many posts on this thread. I hear it all the time:
My dog picked up less sticks today than during our last walk.
I had less colds this year than last year.
My dad gave me less quarters for laundry than what I needed.
These are all wrong. Use “fewer” for announce that are Countable.
I also see fewer/less used inappropriately. It grates.
It may seem picky, but English has such a rich vocabulary that we can be really precise and nuanced in our expressions. And when we are careless with our word choices we throw that richness of possible expression away.
Re the "invite" thing - I hear so many abbreviations it no longer registers. Written English is usually more formal, so we are more likely to notice it in written versus spoken English.
Post by: iris lily on February 04, 2023, 08:14:06 PM
I have a big gripe and a takes forever every year‘s giant April is chests small gripe.
My small gripe is: “invite” when people use that word as a noun, abbreviating “invitation.” I find it mildly annoying.
My bigger gripe is that no one seems to use the word “fewer “ in appropriate places any more. This may have already been addressed in the many posts on this thread. I hear it all the time:
My dog picked up less sticks today than during our last walk.
I had less colds this year than last year.
My dad gave me less quarters for laundry than what I needed.
These are all wrong. Use “fewer” for announce that are Countable.
I also see fewer/less used inappropriately. It grates.
It may seem picky, but English has such a rich vocabulary that we can be really precise and nuanced in our expressions. And when we are careless with our word choices we throw that richness of possible expression away.
Re the "invite" thing - I hear so many abbreviations it no longer registers. Written English is usually more formal, so we are more likely to notice it in written versus spoken English.
I agree that “invite “is just an abbreviation and is not the worst thing in the world. It grates on me personally, but I don’t think it’s the downfall of the Western world like not using “fewer “is.
Post by: sui generis on February 05, 2023, 09:01:03 AM
Or at least I thought it was. Last summer, I had a long discussion with 3 others and we couldn't quite get the right rule. And the other 3 were PhD statisticians, so if they don't automatically know how counting works, we might be in a little bit of trouble, right? Fall of the Western World indeed.
Because in the end, it's not really countable things is it? I think that's a good rule of thumb to get it right the majority of the time, but there's something about countable-discrete vs. countable-continuous. It's definitely fewer when used for like chairs or eyeglasses, but they argued it's gotta be less when applied to things like meters and liters or percentages. I don't really remember their exact argument but it made sense at the time and it's true that "less than 47.375 meters" sounds rather more correct than "fewer than 47.375 meters."
Here's a short article sort of making the same point: https://www.latimes.com/socal/burbank-leader/opinion/tn-blr-me-aword-20170822-story.html
But then that leads to slightly more confusing situations like counting people. People are discrete, so you should use fewer not less. But we often talk about percentages of people, which should be less. A little bit of thinking will probably bring you to the right conclusion, but you can see how certain gray areas can mess the average person up.
Post by: nereo on February 05, 2023, 09:06:06 AM
Post by: Dicey on February 05, 2023, 09:34:36 AM
Apparently the construction was to install EV chargers.
Post by: Metalcat on February 05, 2023, 01:27:06 PM
I really dislike when people say “rice and beans” as shorthand for a diet of imposed frugality. That’s the core component of several billion people of color, and it transcends economic status. DR in particular loves to use it in a very condescending manner (ie “eat rice and beans now so you can eat ‘better’ when you are rich”)
Yeah, that's super gross and more than a little racist.
Gun to my head, if I had to give up all Standard American Diet foods, including steak, burgers, pizza, etc vs giving up Indian, African, Latin American, and Middle Eastern vegetarian "rice and beans" meals?
I'm giving up all of that 'better' food in a heartbeat.
Most of my best, most impressive recipes are legumes and rice dishes.
Post by: GuitarStv on February 05, 2023, 07:19:33 PM
I really dislike when people say “rice and beans” as shorthand for a diet of imposed frugality. That’s the core component of several billion people of color, and it transcends economic status. DR in particular loves to use it in a very condescending manner (ie “eat rice and beans now so you can eat ‘better’ when you are rich”)
Yeah, that's super gross and more than a little racist.
Gun to my head, if I had to give up all Standard American Diet foods, including steak, burgers, pizza, etc vs giving up Indian, African, Latin American, and Middle Eastern vegetarian "rice and beans" meals?
I'm giving up all of that 'better' food in a heartbeat.
Most of my best, most impressive recipes are legumes and rice dishes.
Can't slight beans - the world's greatest food comes from a bean. Chocolate!
Post by: ATtiny85 on February 06, 2023, 05:51:43 AM
I didn't properly learn the fewer vs. less distinction until surprisingly far into my adulthood, so I sort of empathize with people messing it up. And don't even get me started on further vs. farther. I'm just not gonna learn that one, sorry. But once I learned fewer vs. less it was pretty easy.
Or at least I thought it was. Last summer, I had a long discussion with 3 others and we couldn't quite get the right rule. And the other 3 were PhD statisticians, so if they don't automatically know how counting works, we might be in a little bit of trouble, right? Fall of the Western World indeed.
Because in the end, it's not really countable things is it? I think that's a good rule of thumb to get it right the majority of the time, but there's something about countable-discrete vs. countable-continuous. It's definitely fewer when used for like chairs or eyeglasses, but they argued it's gotta be less when applied to things like meters and liters or percentages. I don't really remember their exact argument but it made sense at the time and it's true that "less than 47.375 meters" sounds rather more correct than "fewer than 47.375 meters."
Here's a short article sort of making the same point: https://www.latimes.com/socal/burbank-leader/opinion/tn-blr-me-aword-20170822-story.html
But then that leads to slightly more confusing situations like counting people. People are discrete, so you should use fewer not less. But we often talk about percentages of people, which should be less. A little bit of thinking will probably bring you to the right conclusion, but you can see how certain gray areas can mess the average person up.
I often have to take a short breath because symbolically it is all "less than." There's no math expression that I am aware of that means "fewer than." Of course, we already covered the inability of some folks in the world to understand < and >, so there's that.
Post by: BlueHouse on February 06, 2023, 01:45:51 PM
"vibe analysis" [used in place of a "gut feeling", often in reference to whether an asset is over/under valued]
The word analysis suggests quantitative methods; a way that you can compare things with minimal bias. So "Vibe analysis" is essentially an oxymoron. It's your feelings and opinions.
This is great! I'm out of the workforce now, so I don't get the pleasure of hearing all the latest sayings. One of my favorites was "aerial extraction" to describe the analytical method used to decide something. The first time I heard it, it really did take me a minute to equate it to "pulled it out of thin air".
Post by: Chaplin on February 06, 2023, 02:25:43 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc
Post by: iris lily on February 07, 2023, 11:31:44 AM
I didn't properly learn the fewer vs. less distinction until surprisingly far into my adulthood, so I sort of empathize with people messing it up. And don't even get me started on further vs. farther. I'm just not gonna learn that one, sorry. But once I learned fewer vs. less it was pretty easy.
Or at least I thought it was. Last summer, I had a long discussion with 3 others and we couldn't quite get the right rule. And the other 3 were PhD statisticians, so if they don't automatically know how counting works, we might be in a little bit of trouble, right? Fall of the Western World indeed.
Because in the end, it's not really countable things is it? I think that's a good rule of thumb to get it right the majority of the time, but there's something about countable-discrete vs. countable-continuous. It's definitely fewer when used for like chairs or eyeglasses, but they argued it's gotta be less when applied to things like meters and liters or percentages. I don't really remember their exact argument but it made sense at the time and it's true that "less than 47.375 meters" sounds rather more correct than "fewer than 47.375 meters."
Here's a short article sort of making the same point: https://www.latimes.com/socal/burbank-leader/opinion/tn-blr-me-aword-20170822-story.html
But then that leads to slightly more confusing situations like counting people. People are discrete, so you should use fewer not less. But we often talk about percentages of people, which should be less. A little bit of thinking will probably bring you to the right conclusion, but you can see how certain gray areas can mess the average person up.
Oy! Yes, it isn’t super simple.
The misuses I hear seems super simple to me, but as you point out there are lots of caveats.
Post by: RainyDay on February 08, 2023, 06:27:35 AM
When people use the worded "pet" instead of "petted." Drives me bonkers.
As in: This dog love to be pet. NO, HE DOESN'T. He prefers to be petted.
It has become so common that no one knows it's wrong anymore.
Post by: jnw on February 08, 2023, 07:00:28 AM
Post by: RWD on February 08, 2023, 08:28:45 AM
"cool beans" (never really liked it and don't actually know how it was derived.. is it praising coffee beans? lol.. or did Ronald Reagan invent it to describe his jelly bean collection?)My wife has an encyclopedia of word and phrase origins (https://www.amazon.com/Robert-Hendrickson-Encyclopedia-Phrase-Origins/dp/B00RWR2LRE/) and I just took a look. I could not find "cool beans" listed.
Searching with Google it seems there isn't really a consensus as to where/how the phrase originated.
https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/cool-beans/
Post by: RetiredAt63 on February 08, 2023, 10:16:01 AM
My personal pet peeve (pun intended):
When people use the worded "pet" instead of "petted." Drives me bonkers.
As in: This dog love to be pet. NO, HE DOESN'T. He prefers to be petted.
It has become so common that no one knows it's wrong anymore.
Actually the dog loves to be petted. Typos will get you every time. ;-)
Post by: Dollar Slice on February 08, 2023, 10:25:53 AM
My personal pet peeve (pun intended):
When people use the worded "pet" instead of "petted." Drives me bonkers.
As in: This dog love to be pet. NO, HE DOESN'T. He prefers to be petted.
It has become so common that no one knows it's wrong anymore.
Actually the dog loves to be petted. Typos will get you every time. ;-)
Dogs aren't really sticklers for grammar and word choice, anyway. This dog love to be pet, that dog loves to be petted, the other dog prefers to get pats...
Post by: jnw on February 08, 2023, 10:28:58 AM
Post by: Metalcat on February 08, 2023, 10:38:41 AM
"cool beans" (never really liked it and don't actually know how it was derived.. is it praising coffee beans? lol.. or did Ronald Reagan invent it to describe his jelly bean collection?)My wife has an encyclopedia of word and phrase origins (https://www.amazon.com/Robert-Hendrickson-Encyclopedia-Phrase-Origins/dp/B00RWR2LRE/) and I just took a look. I could not find "cool beans" listed.
Searching with Google it seems there isn't really a consensus as to where/how the phrase originated.
https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/cool-beans/
Yeah, it's a common myth that it comes from Cheech and Chong and drug culture, but it's more accepted to come from "some beans," which was used to connote someone doing something with a lot of enthusiasm. Like "Damn, she was some beans in that debate!" Although I have no doubt that Cheech and Chong popularized "cool beans."
"Some beans" was an evolution of "full of beans," which of course is about race horses feeling energetic from being fed beans. The phrase "feeling one's oats" basically means the same thing and is also about feeding horses.
Post by: nereo on February 08, 2023, 10:58:01 AM
My personal pet peeve (pun intended):
When people use the worded "pet" instead of "petted." Drives me bonkers.
As in: This dog love to be pet. NO, HE DOESN'T. He prefers to be petted.
It has become so common that no one knows it's wrong anymore.
Don’t sweat the petty things, and don’t pet the sweaty things.
Post by: simonsez on February 08, 2023, 12:47:55 PM
Also, don't let the sweaty things pet you!My personal pet peeve (pun intended):
When people use the worded "pet" instead of "petted." Drives me bonkers.
As in: This dog love to be pet. NO, HE DOESN'T. He prefers to be petted.
It has become so common that no one knows it's wrong anymore.
Don’t sweat the petty things, and don’t let the sweaty things.
Post by: GuitarStv on February 08, 2023, 01:53:50 PM
Also, don't let the sweaty things pet you!My personal pet peeve (pun intended):
When people use the worded "pet" instead of "petted." Drives me bonkers.
As in: This dog love to be pet. NO, HE DOESN'T. He prefers to be petted.
It has become so common that no one knows it's wrong anymore.
Don’t sweat the petty things, and don’t let the sweaty things.
Y'all are missing out . . .
Post by: nereo on February 08, 2023, 04:51:23 PM
Post by: iris lily on February 08, 2023, 07:16:15 PM
"cool beans" (never really liked it and don't actually know how it was derived.. is it praising coffee beans? lol.. or did Ronald Reagan invent it to describe his jelly bean collection?)yes, I always thought it was dumb
Post by: Metalcat on February 08, 2023, 07:46:14 PM
Yesterday I learned that “know what a woman is” is apparently a buzzword phrase now, but it seems fairly ambiguous other than signaling opposition to LGBTQ
Never heard this before. What on earth is it supposed to mean other than sounding ominously transphobic?
Post by: Dollar Slice on February 08, 2023, 08:44:33 PM
Never heard this before. What on earth is it supposed to mean other than sounding ominously transphobic?
It's just transphobic BS. If you look through replies to people who defend LGBTQ+ causes on Twitter (or wherever) you'll see endless weirdos randomly replying with comments like that. Or maybe they're bots, there's certainly enough of them. Basically dog whistle hate speech. I think the implication is that they think they can catch people out by demanding they "define what a woman really is" and they won't be able to without using anti-trans definitions or something? It's the sort of insanity you get when you spend too much time in some weird corner of the Internet without coming up for air.
Post by: GuitarStv on February 09, 2023, 07:59:23 AM
Woman - an adult human female
and then if you look up 'female' you get something along the lines of:
Female - of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes.
Now the word 'woman' seems to be commonly used as a descriptor of the societal construct of feminine gender, rather than sex. This has led to some people using statements that twenty years ago would be considered by anyone laughably ridiculous like "This woman has a penis". I don't deny that many people are transphobic (and that's probably causing many of the comments), but you have to admit that this kind of alteration of language is confusing. If you have a particular background, it's entirely possible that you've lived your whole life using and hearing only the original definition of the word woman - it makes sense that there's going to be pushback when something so ingrained in daily use is altered.
Post by: nereo on February 09, 2023, 08:44:04 AM
If you asked a left leaning fully LGBTQ supporting person in 2000 what a woman was, you would get a completely different answer than doing the same today. That's a huge change! If you look it up, most dictionaries (that are ten or more years old) will say something along the lines of:
Woman - an adult human female
and then if you look up 'female' you get something along the lines of:
Female - of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes.
Now the word 'woman' seems to be commonly used as a descriptor of the societal construct of feminine gender, rather than sex. This has led to some people using statements that twenty years ago would be considered by anyone laughably ridiculous like "This woman has a penis". I don't deny that many people are transphobic (and that's probably causing many of the comments), but you have to admit that this kind of alteration of language is confusing. If you have a particular background, it's entirely possible that you've lived your whole life using and hearing only the original definition of the word woman - it makes sense that there's going to be pushback when something so ingrained in daily use is altered.
The word has always depended on the context, at least as long as I've been around. Consider what the different implications are between a hip-hop lyric "she's a real woman' to the pubescent "you are becoming a woman" to bathroom signage "woman" to a "woman-led company" to "woman's rights" to the decidedly icky post-virginial "you are a woman now". All are referring to the word in different social and literal ways.
Post by: Photograph 51 on February 09, 2023, 10:05:04 AM
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
Post by: GuitarStv on February 09, 2023, 10:14:22 AM
If you asked a left leaning fully LGBTQ supporting person in 2000 what a woman was, you would get a completely different answer than doing the same today. That's a huge change! If you look it up, most dictionaries (that are ten or more years old) will say something along the lines of:
Woman - an adult human female
and then if you look up 'female' you get something along the lines of:
Female - of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes.
Now the word 'woman' seems to be commonly used as a descriptor of the societal construct of feminine gender, rather than sex. This has led to some people using statements that twenty years ago would be considered by anyone laughably ridiculous like "This woman has a penis". I don't deny that many people are transphobic (and that's probably causing many of the comments), but you have to admit that this kind of alteration of language is confusing. If you have a particular background, it's entirely possible that you've lived your whole life using and hearing only the original definition of the word woman - it makes sense that there's going to be pushback when something so ingrained in daily use is altered.
The word has always depended on the context, at least as long as I've been around. Consider what the different implications are between a hip-hop lyric "she's a real woman' to the pubescent "you are becoming a woman" to bathroom signage "woman" to a "woman-led company" to "woman's rights" to the decidedly icky post-virginial "you are a woman now". All are referring to the word in different social and literal ways.
Different contextual nuances sure, but I'd argue that (until recently) every one of those usages was specific to someone of female sex. It is a very recent development that 'woman' could refer to someone with a penis. I'm not against the change in the word, but you have to acknowledge that there has been a pretty big change. It makes sense that a lot of people are going to be slow to assimilate.
Post by: Metalcat on February 09, 2023, 10:47:11 AM
If you asked a left leaning fully LGBTQ supporting person in 2000 what a woman was, you would get a completely different answer than doing the same today. That's a huge change! If you look it up, most dictionaries (that are ten or more years old) will say something along the lines of:
Woman - an adult human female
and then if you look up 'female' you get something along the lines of:
Female - of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes.
Now the word 'woman' seems to be commonly used as a descriptor of the societal construct of feminine gender, rather than sex. This has led to some people using statements that twenty years ago would be considered by anyone laughably ridiculous like "This woman has a penis". I don't deny that many people are transphobic (and that's probably causing many of the comments), but you have to admit that this kind of alteration of language is confusing. If you have a particular background, it's entirely possible that you've lived your whole life using and hearing only the original definition of the word woman - it makes sense that there's going to be pushback when something so ingrained in daily use is altered.
The word has always depended on the context, at least as long as I've been around. Consider what the different implications are between a hip-hop lyric "she's a real woman' to the pubescent "you are becoming a woman" to bathroom signage "woman" to a "woman-led company" to "woman's rights" to the decidedly icky post-virginial "you are a woman now". All are referring to the word in different social and literal ways.
Different contextual nuances sure, but I'd argue that (until recently) every one of those usages was specific to someone of female sex. It is a very recent development that 'woman' could refer to someone with a penis. I'm not against the change in the word, but you have to acknowledge that there has been a pretty big change. It makes sense that a lot of people are going to be slow to assimilate.
Sure, but there's a difference between understanding that change takes time and when something becomes a hateful dog whistle, which seems to be what the pp who posted it is suggesting.
It's like the first time I ever saw #alllivesmatter I had no clue what the hell it meant, it looked like a wholesome, inclusive hashtag similar to "Every Child Matters." But nooooooooo, my first instinct was very wrong!
In truth "know what a woman is" could be used by either side of the trans ideology. The concept doesn't belong to either side. But clearly the phrase has taken on a meaning of its own according to the pp who posted it.
There's a HUGE difference between the idea expressed by a phrase on its face and when a phrase becomes a dog whistle for a larger ideology.
The phrase stops meaning what it says and starts meaning something much larger.
Post by: GuitarStv on February 09, 2023, 12:42:14 PM
The first time that I heard of pregnant men and women with penises lots of 'WTF?' alarms started ringing in the back of my head. It took a fair amount of reasoning and thought before I could understand where the change was coming from and then accept the transition of the words from the meaning and form that I grew up with to the current usage of the term.
Post by: Metalcat on February 09, 2023, 02:25:05 PM
Yep. Agreed. I just like to bring up the possibility that a comments along those lines might not always be dog whistles.
The first time that I heard of pregnant men and women with penises lots of 'WTF?' alarms started ringing in the back of my head. It took a fair amount of reasoning and thought before I could understand where the change was coming from and then accept the transition of the words from the meaning and form that I grew up with to the current usage of the term.
Sure, but it seemed pretty clear from the pp's post that they had just learned a new dog whistle. Granted, they haven't clarified that, but to me, that seemed very evident from how they phrased it.
Post by: jnw on February 09, 2023, 03:57:33 PM
I don't like "I'm sorry you feel that way." The person is trying to count this as an apology, but it is totally not an apology. Instead, it shifts the blame to the other person by saying that the problem is not the offense that the first person committed, but rather is that the other person did not care for being the victim of the offense. This phrase says that if the other person would just stop feeling that way, then there would be no problem, even though in reality the other person's feeling is appropriate for the occasion.
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
Well I can think of an example to use this phrase. Say you get pulled over and officer starts asking you questions, and you reply, "Respectfully, Officer Smith, I never answer any questions at traffic stops". The officer then replies, "Why are you giving me trouble, no one else says this". "I'm sorry you feel that way officer, but I'm just exercising my 5th ammendment right to not answer your questions, I am sure you understand." Because in reality it is the officers attitude that's causing the problem not the driver; I'm not going to sit there an entertain an officer's fishing expedition, letting him fabricate/manufacture things.. I've seen so many videos of innocent people getting harmed by officers for doing nothing at all illegal.
EDIT: I suppose I'll change it to "It's a shame you feel that way officer..." changing "I'm sorry" to "It's a shame". That sounds better.
Post by: Tyson on February 09, 2023, 04:27:51 PM
I don't like "I'm sorry you feel that way." The person is trying to count this as an apology, but it is totally not an apology. Instead, it shifts the blame to the other person by saying that the problem is not the offense that the first person committed, but rather is that the other person did not care for being the victim of the offense. This phrase says that if the other person would just stop feeling that way, then there would be no problem, even though in reality the other person's feeling is appropriate for the occasion.
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
I'm sorry you feel that way.
(couldn't resist) :D
Post by: dividendman on February 09, 2023, 08:08:09 PM
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
Post by: Metalcat on February 09, 2023, 08:09:24 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
Post by: Paul der Krake on February 09, 2023, 08:20:24 PM
Post by: Photograph 51 on February 10, 2023, 03:41:40 AM
I don't like "I'm sorry you feel that way." The person is trying to count this as an apology, but it is totally not an apology. Instead, it shifts the blame to the other person by saying that the problem is not the offense that the first person committed, but rather is that the other person did not care for being the victim of the offense. This phrase says that if the other person would just stop feeling that way, then there would be no problem, even though in reality the other person's feeling is appropriate for the occasion.
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
I'm sorry you feel that way.
(couldn't resist) :D
You should have resisted. Your comment was hurtful, immature, and inappropriate. I pointed out a phrase that is commonly used to victim shame and you response was to make a tasteless joke. Not okay. You owe me a genuine apology.
Post by: Photograph 51 on February 10, 2023, 03:55:38 AM
I don't like "I'm sorry you feel that way." The person is trying to count this as an apology, but it is totally not an apology. Instead, it shifts the blame to the other person by saying that the problem is not the offense that the first person committed, but rather is that the other person did not care for being the victim of the offense. This phrase says that if the other person would just stop feeling that way, then there would be no problem, even though in reality the other person's feeling is appropriate for the occasion.
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
Well I can think of an example to use this phrase. Say you get pulled over and officer starts asking you questions, and you reply, "Respectfully, Officer Smith, I never answer any questions at traffic stops". The officer then replies, "Why are you giving me trouble, no one else says this". "I'm sorry you feel that way officer, but I'm just exercising my 5th ammendment right to not answer your questions, I am sure you understand." Because in reality it is the officers attitude that's causing the problem not the driver; I'm not going to sit there an entertain an officer's fishing expedition, letting him fabricate/manufacture things.. I've seen so many videos of innocent people getting harmed by officers for doing nothing at all illegal.
EDIT: I suppose I'll change it to "It's a shame you feel that way officer..." changing "I'm sorry" to "It's a shame". That sounds better.
The exchange doesn't even make sense, since the officer didn't even express any emotions, so there would be no need to apologize a non-expressed emotion of another person. How does someone apologize for someone else's emotions, anyways? We have no control over other people's emotions, so it makes no sense to "apologize" for their emotions. It seems like the driver disagrees with the officer's statements, not the officer's feelings. The driver could easily respond to the officer's question by saying, "I'm exercising my constitutional rights." There is no need to offer a fake "apology."
Post by: ATtiny85 on February 10, 2023, 05:12:12 AM
I don't like "I'm sorry you feel that way." The person is trying to count this as an apology, but it is totally not an apology. Instead, it shifts the blame to the other person by saying that the problem is not the offense that the first person committed, but rather is that the other person did not care for being the victim of the offense. This phrase says that if the other person would just stop feeling that way, then there would be no problem, even though in reality the other person's feeling is appropriate for the occasion.
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
I'm sorry you feel that way.
(couldn't resist) :D
It was too easy, right? Reminds me of “lighten up Francis” from Stripes. Good stuff.
Post by: jnw on February 10, 2023, 05:50:05 AM
I don't like "I'm sorry you feel that way." The person is trying to count this as an apology, but it is totally not an apology. Instead, it shifts the blame to the other person by saying that the problem is not the offense that the first person committed, but rather is that the other person did not care for being the victim of the offense. This phrase says that if the other person would just stop feeling that way, then there would be no problem, even though in reality the other person's feeling is appropriate for the occasion.
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
Well I can think of an example to use this phrase. Say you get pulled over and officer starts asking you questions, and you reply, "Respectfully, Officer Smith, I never answer any questions at traffic stops". The officer then replies, "Why are you giving me trouble, no one else says this". "I'm sorry you feel that way officer, but I'm just exercising my 5th ammendment right to not answer your questions, I am sure you understand." Because in reality it is the officers attitude that's causing the problem not the driver; I'm not going to sit there an entertain an officer's fishing expedition, letting him fabricate/manufacture things.. I've seen so many videos of innocent people getting harmed by officers for doing nothing at all illegal.
EDIT: I suppose I'll change it to "It's a shame you feel that way officer..." changing "I'm sorry" to "It's a shame". That sounds better.
The exchange doesn't even make sense, since the officer didn't even express any emotions, so there would be no need to apologize a non-expressed emotion of another person. How does someone apologize for someone else's emotions, anyways? We have no control over other people's emotions, so it makes no sense to "apologize" for their emotions. It seems like the driver disagrees with the officer's statements, not the officer's feelings. The driver could easily respond to the officer's question by saying, "I'm exercising my constitutional rights." There is no need to offer a fake "apology."
The officer needs to understand that his feelings are getting in the way if he complains about one exercising their constitutional rights. He is a law enforcement officer not a feelings enforcement officer. If he continues to be inappropriate I'll have him call his supervisor. The only thing you are legally obligated to do at a traffic stop is give the officer your id, registration and proof of insurance, as well as get out of the car if he says to. You don't have to answer a single question no matter what he asks or how much he asks. About the only question I'd answer is "can I search you or your car" and I'd respond "I don't consent to searches."
I find your reply interesting since in the example scenario I gave you, it was the officer who first RUDELY implied there was some problem with the driver. I feel it's appropriate to shift it right back where it belongs.. back to the officer, to let them know in this case, they are the one in the wrong.
EDIT: Also when one says "I'm sorry" it doesn't necessarily mean an apology. It could mean "I feel sorrow for the situation".. e.g when someone dies "I'm sorry for your loss". You aren't apologizing to the person that their friend or family member died, you're expressing your sorrow.
Post by: Freedomin5 on February 10, 2023, 06:58:49 AM
I don't like "I'm sorry you feel that way." The person is trying to count this as an apology, but it is totally not an apology. Instead, it shifts the blame to the other person by saying that the problem is not the offense that the first person committed, but rather is that the other person did not care for being the victim of the offense. This phrase says that if the other person would just stop feeling that way, then there would be no problem, even though in reality the other person's feeling is appropriate for the occasion.
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
I’ve used “I’m sorry you feel that way” on occasion.
There will always be people who don’t like you, no matter what, even if you do everything right, they’ll think you did it wrong. So rather than try to justify myself or agree with them when they’re being emotionally or verbally abusive, I’ll just say “I’m sorry you feel that way.”
Post by: Photograph 51 on February 10, 2023, 07:09:53 AM
I don't like "I'm sorry you feel that way." The person is trying to count this as an apology, but it is totally not an apology. Instead, it shifts the blame to the other person by saying that the problem is not the offense that the first person committed, but rather is that the other person did not care for being the victim of the offense. This phrase says that if the other person would just stop feeling that way, then there would be no problem, even though in reality the other person's feeling is appropriate for the occasion.
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
Well I can think of an example to use this phrase. Say you get pulled over and officer starts asking you questions, and you reply, "Respectfully, Officer Smith, I never answer any questions at traffic stops". The officer then replies, "Why are you giving me trouble, no one else says this". "I'm sorry you feel that way officer, but I'm just exercising my 5th ammendment right to not answer your questions, I am sure you understand." Because in reality it is the officers attitude that's causing the problem not the driver; I'm not going to sit there an entertain an officer's fishing expedition, letting him fabricate/manufacture things.. I've seen so many videos of innocent people getting harmed by officers for doing nothing at all illegal.
EDIT: I suppose I'll change it to "It's a shame you feel that way officer..." changing "I'm sorry" to "It's a shame". That sounds better.
The exchange doesn't even make sense, since the officer didn't even express any emotions, so there would be no need to apologize a non-expressed emotion of another person. How does someone apologize for someone else's emotions, anyways? We have no control over other people's emotions, so it makes no sense to "apologize" for their emotions. It seems like the driver disagrees with the officer's statements, not the officer's feelings. The driver could easily respond to the officer's question by saying, "I'm exercising my constitutional rights." There is no need to offer a fake "apology."
The officer needs to understand that his feelings are getting in the way if he complains about one exercising their constitutional rights. He is a law enforcement officer not a feelings enforcement officer. If he continues to be inappropriate I'll have him call his supervisor. The only thing you are legally obligated to do at a traffic stop is give the officer your id, registration and proof of insurance, as well as get out of the car if he says to. You don't have to answer a single question no matter what he asks or how much he asks. About the only question I'd answer is "can I search you or your car" and I'd respond "I don't consent to searches."
I find your reply interesting since in the example scenario I gave you, it was the officer who first RUDELY implied there was some problem with the driver. I feel it's appropriate to shift it right back where it belongs.. back to the officer, to let them know in this case, they are the one in the wrong.
EDIT: Also when one says "I'm sorry" it doesn't necessarily mean an apology. It could mean "I feel sorrow for the situation".. e.g when someone dies "I'm sorry for your loss". You aren't apologizing to the person that their friend or family member died, you're expressing your sorrow.
In your example, the officer did not rudely imply that there was a problem with the driver. The officer asked a question. The appropriate response would be to answer the question. Examples: "I am exercising my Constitutional rights," "I don't wish to answer," "I wish to remain silent," etc. If the officer did behave in a way in which a driver thought that emotions are involved, the driver could say, "I think you are using emotions when you should be using reason," "You are treating me in an inappropriate manner," or suchlike. A person never has the right to apologize for someone else's emotions. Personally, in any interactions I have with police officers, I do whatever they say because they have guns and I don't, but if I were going to call them out on inappropriate behavior, I wouldtell them which behavior is inappropriate and request that the behavior change. I wouldn't try to own their emotions by giving a fake apology.
Saying "I'm sorry for your loss" is completely different than "I'm sorry you feel that way." If someone is mourning the loss of a loved one, the former is appropriate. The latter is a slap in the face.
Post by: Photograph 51 on February 10, 2023, 07:15:17 AM
I don't like "I'm sorry you feel that way." The person is trying to count this as an apology, but it is totally not an apology. Instead, it shifts the blame to the other person by saying that the problem is not the offense that the first person committed, but rather is that the other person did not care for being the victim of the offense. This phrase says that if the other person would just stop feeling that way, then there would be no problem, even though in reality the other person's feeling is appropriate for the occasion.
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
I’ve used “I’m sorry you feel that way” on occasion.
There will always be people who don’t like you, no matter what, even if you do everything right, they’ll think you did it wrong. So rather than try to justify myself or agree with them when they’re being emotionally or verbally abusive, I’ll just say “I’m sorry you feel that way.”
Then please stop. If someone is engaging in emotional or verbal abuse, you could say, "Your behavior is abusive and I will not engage with you until you treat me with respect." You do not have the right to apologize for another person's emotions, nor is saying "I'm sorry you feel that way" going to be helpful for changing their behavior or resolving the matter. Why is this so difficult for people to understand this? Please read the following articles to gain insight on this:
https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/gaslighting-apology-toxic-relationships-friendships
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-mental-health-revolution/202203/i-m-sorry-you-feel-way-and-other-gaslighting-tactics
https://www.thecandidly.com/2019/im-sorry-you-feel-that-way-exactly-how-to-apologize-like-a-grown-up
https://skillpath.com/blog/how-to-apologize
https://students.ouhsc.edu/news/article/im-sorry-you-feel-that-wayunderstanding-gaslighting
Post by: ATtiny85 on February 10, 2023, 07:23:41 AM
Post by: Kris on February 10, 2023, 07:30:57 AM
An expression of apology or penitence is only one of the definitions of "sorry." And as someone who both cares about and enjoys language, I fully endorse using the panoply of options at our disposal. It can also be used as sympathy, compassion, or acknowledgment that a situation is regrettable.
Sorry, like many words, has multiple meanings.
Post by: GilesMM on February 10, 2023, 07:33:03 AM
"I'm sorry you feel that way" is not an apology, nor is it meant to be. It is expressing sadness or regret about the situation. It's an entirely appropriate use of the word.
...
Only they typically are not really sorry you feel that way. I think it would be more truthful if they said something like "It is unfortunate you feel that way".
But, how do we go about making all these unwanted words and phrases go away? Complain loudly every time we hear them?
Post by: jnw on February 10, 2023, 07:36:30 AM
In your example, the officer did not rudely imply that there was a problem with the driver.
Wrong, that's how you interpreted it. The officers frown when they say this. They raise their voice loudly. They make loud breathing noises. The might even put their hand on the gun. They use intimidation tactics. They keep harassing you no matter how polite you are. Everything I said was very polite to the officer including the answer to his first question: "Officer Smith, respectfully, I never answer questions at traffic stops". The officers go on and on with temper tamptrums when they don't get their way. They often get EXTREMELY emotional. It's the officer that is wrong in this case. They need to know they are in the wrong. And the most polite way I thought to say this is "I'm sorry you feel that way, but I'm just excercising my fifth ammendment right". Also the "I'm sorry" isnt' really an apology, but an expression of sadness that the officer is violating your rights .. just like saying "I'm sorry for your loss" is not an apology but expressing sorrow. Anywyas I am done arguing about this. I think you have too much of a personal hangup, not thinking about what someone is truly saying when they say I'm sorry.. it's not always an apology.
Post by: Morning Glory on February 10, 2023, 10:40:19 AM
E.g.
Employee: "my chair is broken "
Boss: "I'm sorry you feel that way"
Post by: Tyson on February 10, 2023, 10:48:49 AM
I don't like "I'm sorry you feel that way." The person is trying to count this as an apology, but it is totally not an apology. Instead, it shifts the blame to the other person by saying that the problem is not the offense that the first person committed, but rather is that the other person did not care for being the victim of the offense. This phrase says that if the other person would just stop feeling that way, then there would be no problem, even though in reality the other person's feeling is appropriate for the occasion.
Example: An employee complains about sexual harassment in the workplace, explaining why the perpetrator's actions are creepy and need to stop. When the perpetrator is called out on this and the victim explains how what he is doing makes her skin crawl, he responds "I'm sorry you feel that way" and expects the problem to go away without him having to own up to his behavior.
I'm sorry you feel that way.
(couldn't resist) :D
You should have resisted. Your comment was hurtful, immature, and inappropriate. I pointed out a phrase that is commonly used to victim shame and you response was to make a tasteless joke. Not okay. You owe me a genuine apology.
It was meant as a light hearted jest. I'm sorry.
Post by: dividendman on February 10, 2023, 12:19:32 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
Post by: Kris on February 10, 2023, 01:02:30 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
I like it, too. I have to stop myself from using it because at my age it would sound too try-hard coming out of my mouth.
Post by: Metalcat on February 10, 2023, 01:16:38 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
I like it, too. I have to stop myself from using it because at my age it would sound too try-hard coming out of my mouth.
Same, when I said I like it, I mean that I like it when the younger people I know use it. I wouldn't use it. I don't think my slang has really changed since the 90s.
Post by: dividendman on February 10, 2023, 01:17:02 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
I like it, too. I have to stop myself from using it because at my age it would sound too try-hard coming out of my mouth.
But it makes how we talk on fleek.
Post by: GuitarStv on February 10, 2023, 01:47:57 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
I like it, too. I have to stop myself from using it because at my age it would sound too try-hard coming out of my mouth.
But it makes how we talk on fleek.
Words so phat they're sick.
Post by: Morning Glory on February 10, 2023, 02:05:54 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
I like it, too. I have to stop myself from using it because at my age it would sound too try-hard coming out of my mouth.
But it makes how we talk on fleek.
Words so phat they're sick.
Careful now. If you sound too sus you might get yeeted.
Post by: Kris on February 10, 2023, 02:14:35 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
I like it, too. I have to stop myself from using it because at my age it would sound too try-hard coming out of my mouth.
But it makes how we talk on fleek.
Words so phat they're sick.
Careful now. If you sound too sus you might get yeeted.
Imma yeet that comment into the sun.
Post by: GuitarStv on February 10, 2023, 03:27:34 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
I like it, too. I have to stop myself from using it because at my age it would sound too try-hard coming out of my mouth.
But it makes how we talk on fleek.
Words so phat they're sick.
Careful now. If you sound too sus you might get yeeted.
Imma yeet that comment into the sun.
Thread's sounding hella wiggity wack now.
Post by: Josiecat22222 on February 10, 2023, 04:06:07 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
I like it, too. I have to stop myself from using it because at my age it would sound too try-hard coming out of my mouth.
But it makes how we talk on fleek.
Words so phat they're sick.
Careful now. If you sound too sus you might get yeeted.
Imma yeet that comment into the sun.
Thread's sounding hella wiggity wack now.
no cap
Post by: Kris on February 10, 2023, 04:56:29 PM
How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
I like it, too. I have to stop myself from using it because at my age it would sound too try-hard coming out of my mouth.
But it makes how we talk on fleek.
Words so phat they're sick.
Careful now. If you sound too sus you might get yeeted.
Imma yeet that comment into the sun.
Thread's sounding hella wiggity wack now.
no cap
Based.
Post by: jnw on February 10, 2023, 05:22:50 PM
Russian doll.How about "gonna slap" for something that's going to be awesome.
e.g. The party tomorrow's gonna slap yo!
I actually like that one.
ETA: apparently this particular slang comes out of the Bay Area
I've been using it to bug my family and it's starting to grow on me haha.
I like it, too. I have to stop myself from using it because at my age it would sound too try-hard coming out of my mouth.
But it makes how we talk on fleek.
Words so phat they're sick.
Careful now. If you sound too sus you might get yeeted.
Imma yeet that comment into the sun.
Thread's sounding hella wiggity wack now.
no cap
Based.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on March 17, 2023, 07:40:19 PM
Post by: Frugal Lizard on March 17, 2023, 08:06:39 PM
Post by: GilesMM on March 17, 2023, 08:21:42 PM
Post by: Dicey on March 18, 2023, 12:55:10 PM
Found a good t-shirt theme today.Want.
Post by: Josiecat22222 on March 18, 2023, 03:31:38 PM
Post by: Dicey on March 18, 2023, 03:41:42 PM
@Dicey, my mother, the former English teacher, loved that shirt. There was a whole book on that called "Eats, shoots and leaves" with a Koala on the cover that was popular.Snirt, I loved that book, too. I even have the fancy illustrated edition. Purchased for $1 at the used book sale, naturally. Please tell your mom I said "hi".
Post by: Miss Piggy on March 20, 2023, 12:57:56 PM
I am “literally” fed up with the word.
Especially when it's pronounced "litrally." Grrrr...
Post by: BlueHouse on September 23, 2023, 09:37:06 PM
Granted, it's not a word I use routinely, but what the heck?
How do you guys say Victuals? (before googling it)?
Post by: Dicey on September 24, 2023, 01:46:38 AM
I just found out I've been pronouncing "Victuals" incorrectly for my entire life.I honestly thought victuals and vittles had different meanings.
Granted, it's not a word I use routinely, but what the heck?
How do you guys say Victuals? (before googling it)?
Post by: daverobev on September 24, 2023, 04:09:41 AM
Post by: Dancin'Dog on September 24, 2023, 07:30:25 AM
Post by: RWD on September 24, 2023, 08:43:05 AM
I just found out I've been pronouncing "Victuals" incorrectly for my entire life.Looks like I've been pronouncing it wrong (in my head, never used it in conversation) as well... Now I'm not even certain if I've heard it used in conversation before.
Post by: Dee on September 24, 2023, 06:46:18 PM
Post by: BlueHouse on September 24, 2023, 06:51:34 PM
I just found out I've been pronouncing "Victuals" incorrectly for my entire life.I honestly thought victuals and vittles had different meanings.
Granted, it's not a word I use routinely, but what the heck?
How do you guys say Victuals? (before googling it)?
Same here.
There was a small diner near where I lived in Georgia called "Vittles". We used to see Newt Gingrich there on Sunday mornings. It was really unhealthy food.
Post by: Morning Glory on September 24, 2023, 08:43:42 PM
I just found out I've been pronouncing "Victuals" incorrectly for my entire life.I honestly thought victuals and vittles had different meanings.
Granted, it's not a word I use routinely, but what the heck?
How do you guys say Victuals? (before googling it)?
Same here.
There was a small diner near where I lived in Georgia called "Vittles". We used to see Newt Gingrich there on Sunday mornings. It was really unhealthy food.
There used to be "tender vittles " cat food too. I was aware of "Victuals" from books but didn't realize they were pronounced the same.
Post by: RetiredAt63 on September 24, 2023, 08:58:30 PM
I just found out I've been pronouncing "Victuals" incorrectly for my entire life.I honestly thought victuals and vittles had different meanings.
Granted, it's not a word I use routinely, but what the heck?
How do you guys say Victuals? (before googling it)?
Same here.
There was a small diner near where I lived in Georgia called "Vittles". We used to see Newt Gingrich there on Sunday mornings. It was really unhealthy food.
There used to be "tender vittles " cat food too. I was aware of "Victuals" from books but didn't realize they were pronounced the same.
I have never actually used either word, but I assumed "victuals" was to "vittles" as "I am going to" was to "I'mgonna".
Post by: Metalcat on September 25, 2023, 04:34:18 AM
I just found out I've been pronouncing "Victuals" incorrectly for my entire life.I honestly thought victuals and vittles had different meanings.
Granted, it's not a word I use routinely, but what the heck?
How do you guys say Victuals? (before googling it)?
Same here.
There was a small diner near where I lived in Georgia called "Vittles". We used to see Newt Gingrich there on Sunday mornings. It was really unhealthy food.
There used to be "tender vittles " cat food too. I was aware of "Victuals" from books but didn't realize they were pronounced the same.
I have never actually used either word, but I assumed "victuals" was to "vittles" as "I am going to" was to "I'mgonna".
It is the same word with the same meaning.
This happens sometimes with less common, old words that are spelled very differently than they are pronounced. Usually one version takes over eventually, but not in this case.
Back in the day when illiteracy was common, certain words were known only by sound in some populations and in writing in others.
The word "Apron" is a good example. It was always "napron" because it hangs from the nape of your neck. However, if you say "a napron" it sounds like "an apron" and aprons weren't used much by the reading class, so the phonetic version took over and the original disappeared, and then when everyone learned to read, the more common version "apron" was accepted and transcribed and accepted as the correct version.
Same with Pea Soup. There was no singular of "pea" in cooking, it was always "peas," hence the alternative name "peas porridge." It was always Peas Soup in writing, but the class of folks that made and ate Peas Soup mostly learned it by sound, and by sound "Peas Soup" sounds like "Pea Soup."
Victuals would have been known by writing by a certain class and "vittles" would have been how the illiterate class thought it was spelled when they learned to read and write.
But chances are that the term victuals/vittles was already phasing out of common use by then, so neither side took over because it was use infrequently enough to not need "one true spelling." The uses of each may have also stayed class divided for a very long time, and from what I understand, the "vittles" version persists largely because it was transported to America and took hold as the norm there.
Which is again a manifestation product of class division of language.
Language was much more variable before we had almost everyone reading the same form of language in books and hearing the same form of language on radio and TV.
We don't have a ton of extant examples of multiple forms of a word surviving because if the word is common enough, one form usually "wins" and becomes what everyone thinks is the "correct" one, even if that version comes from an error, like "apron."
Post by: BlueHouse on September 25, 2023, 11:20:55 AM
I'm looking forward to the day when all words with silent "b"s are rewritten.I just found out I've been pronouncing "Victuals" incorrectly for my entire life.I honestly thought victuals and vittles had different meanings.
Granted, it's not a word I use routinely, but what the heck?
How do you guys say Victuals? (before googling it)?
Same here.
There was a small diner near where I lived in Georgia called "Vittles". We used to see Newt Gingrich there on Sunday mornings. It was really unhealthy food.
There used to be "tender vittles " cat food too. I was aware of "Victuals" from books but didn't realize they were pronounced the same.
I have never actually used either word, but I assumed "victuals" was to "vittles" as "I am going to" was to "I'mgonna".
It is the same word with the same meaning.
This happens sometimes with less common, old words that are spelled very differently than they are pronounced. Usually one version takes over eventually, but not in this case.
Back in the day when illiteracy was common, certain words were known only by sound in some populations and in writing in others.
Debt
Subtle
doubt
I suppose we'll start writing more like we text though.
Prolly
Post by: Metalcat on September 25, 2023, 11:35:05 AM
I'm looking forward to the day when all words with silent "b"s are rewritten.
Debt
Subtle
doubt
I suppose we'll start writing more like we text though.
Prolly
"Could of" is already becoming normalized.
Post by: GuitarStv on September 25, 2023, 12:35:41 PM
I'm looking forward to the day when all words with silent "b"s are rewritten.
Debt
Subtle
doubt
I suppose we'll start writing more like we text though.
Prolly
"Could of" is already becoming normalized.
I think you mean coulda'.
Post by: Metalcat on September 25, 2023, 01:33:40 PM
I'm looking forward to the day when all words with silent "b"s are rewritten.
Debt
Subtle
doubt
I suppose we'll start writing more like we text though.
Prolly
"Could of" is already becoming normalized.
I think you mean coulda'.
lol, no, I mean "could of." Everyone knows "coulda" is a colloquial short form, but an enormous amount of the population believe that "could of" is correct.
Post by: iluvzbeach on September 25, 2023, 05:34:28 PM
I'm looking forward to the day when all words with silent "b"s are rewritten.
Debt
Subtle
doubt
I suppose we'll start writing more like we text though.
Prolly
"Could of" is already becoming normalized.
I think you mean coulda'.
lol, no, I mean "could of." Everyone knows "coulda" is a colloquial short form, but an enormous amount of the population believe that "could of" is correct.
Yes, "could of" and "would of" both drive me absolutely bonkers!
Another one that I see more and more is people using "an" instead of "and" (i.e. Bob an Michelle were eating dinner, or they were eating steak an fries for dinner. Initially I thought they were just typos but when I see people doing it multiple times throughout what they are writing (and multiple people doing it for that matter), I no longer believe it is a typo.
Post by: Metalcat on September 25, 2023, 07:37:09 PM
I'm looking forward to the day when all words with silent "b"s are rewritten.
Debt
Subtle
doubt
I suppose we'll start writing more like we text though.
Prolly
"Could of" is already becoming normalized.
I think you mean coulda'.
lol, no, I mean "could of." Everyone knows "coulda" is a colloquial short form, but an enormous amount of the population believe that "could of" is correct.
Yes, "could of" and "would of" both drive me absolutely bonkers!
Another one that I see more and more is people using "an" instead of "and" (i.e. Bob an Michelle were eating dinner, or they were eating steak an fries for dinner. Initially I thought they were just typos but when I see people doing it multiple times throughout what they are writing (and multiple people doing it for that matter), I no longer believe it is a typo.
Interesting, I haven't seen that one, at least not enough to not automatically mistake it for a typo.
Surely though, even if it is intentional, the writer is aware that the word is "and." They're just using a quirky short form similar to Bob 'n Michelle, I would imagine.
Whereas the "could of/would of" folks seem to genuinely believe that it is correct and don't realize that the sound "could've" is a contraction of "could have."
People who read a lot tend to mispronounce words and people who don't read a lot tend to phonetically misspell words.
"Could of" is a classic phonetic misspelling because that's exactly what the phrase sounds like, but it's a dead giveaway that the person doesn't read much.
Post by: Sanitary Stache on September 27, 2023, 01:53:11 PM
Post by: Metalcat on September 27, 2023, 02:20:39 PM
@Metalcat your break down’ve could of seems to apply just as aptly to phonetically spelling peanut butter an jelly.
I'm just having a hard time imagining anyone who can spell "peanut butter" and "jelly" not knowing the correct spelling of "and."
The phonetic spelling I was describing was for when people don't actually know how to spell something properly, which is how phonetic versions like "vittles," "an apron," and "could of" come to be, because enough people truly believe those spellings are correct and they become the norm.
Not that "could of" is a norm yet, but it's rapidly getting there.
"An" is being spelled phonetically, but the same way "'n" would be, like "peanut butter 'n jelly." I imagine "an" has arisen to replace "'n" because although it's easy to write "'n" on paper, it actually takes a lot longer to type it out.
It's like the difference between "could of," which is a phonetically based error and "coulda," which is a phonetically based abbreviation.
A lot of text-speak is abbreviations, so "an" could be similar to "u/ur" in place of "you/your." Where the person writing it is abbreviating because it's a casual text exchange, but would never write that way in a formal professional context.
Meanwhile, the "could of" folks legitimately believe that's correct, and their version could become so common that it becomes accepted over time.
There's a huge difference between errors that take over, like "an apron" or "vittles," and a casual version of a normal spelling like "coulda" or "u."
Just because both are influenced by how the word sounds doesn't make them the same phenomenon. It all comes down to whether the majority of writers using it know the correct spelling in the first place.
Virtually no one who knows "could of" is wrong would ever write "could of." But plenty of people who know how to spell "you" will type it as "u" in a casual context.