malapropisms and other misusage

[jpowers]

Here are some pointers on how we could try to save some semblance of Anglophone Civilization:

Penultimate means 'the one before the final,' not 'final'
There is no word 'irregardless'
'Ubiquitous' does not mean 'important,' 'required,' or 'fancy'
'cheese' does not contain the letter 'z'
'Expectorant' is not someone you are waiting for
'Similar' doesn't rhyme with 'familiar'
You cannot 'effect' someone.
No one has an 'affect' on someone else
A 'Northerly' wind goes from the South to the North
'Disinterested' does not mean 'uninterested'
'amoral' does not mean 'immoral'
'media' is the plural form of the word
'data' is the plural form of the word
You cannot 'except' a package from Fedex
You cannot like everyone 'accept' me
'Capital' is what Marx and Engles were on about
'Capitol' is the building they wanted to knock over
'Climactic' has nothing to do with the weather
'Principles' do not run schools (maybe some religious schools...)
'You're' means 'you are' not 'you possess'
A chicken 'lays' eggs and 'laid' them yesterday.
I 'lie' down in my bed, I 'lay' down in it yesterday.
'Alright' is not a word
You cannot 'complement' someone by saying their eyes are pretty
You cannot 'compliment' a report by adding charts to it
You cannot run 'further'
You cannot discuss a topic 'farther'

Any other faves?

 

[Dralix]

Nice work!

Originally posted by jpowers
Any other faves?

Yes, although I don't know how to describe it. A friend of mine uses "anymore" to mean "now," or maybe "always." Something like "I do all my shopping on the internet anymore."

Also ...

You can chop wood with an axe.
You cannot axe me a question.
Canada has Provinces, Rhode Island has Providence.

 

[Pillager]

Any others?

Yes:


"Alot" is not a word.

 

[Pillager]

Originally posted by jpowers

You cannot 'effect' someone.

Just to confuse those with a shaky grasp of English, you can 'effect something'.

 

[gr8ful wes]

thanks

 

[jpowers]

Originally posted by Pillager


Just to confuse those with a shaky grasp of English, you can 'effect something'.

True, just as you can have an 'affect' which is an emotional state, not a causal relationship.

 

[nixon]

There is no word 'irregardless'

Actually, there is. It's a nonstandard word, though, meaning that regardless should be used instead.

 

[Dralix]

Originally posted by jpowers
not a causal relationship.

A causal relationship is one of cause and effect.
A casual relationship is one of casual sex

 

[insurgent]

vat hash provokd tis blatnt attak on us foreners, i meen its not leik ve maik mistaiks all de teim... onestli, im hurted


No, seriously, what has triggered this thread? I don't find the English on this board to be that lousy. Why can't you just accept that everyone in the world is not fluent in English? The important thing is that we understand each other, and I sometimes find the quibbling of English-speaking posters even more annoying than poor English.
We can't all be bothered to learn your language to perfection, would you be bothered learning ours? No, right?

...

 

[Pillager]

Originally posted by insurgent
vat hash provokd tis blatnt attak on us foreners, i meen its not leik ve maik mistaiks all de teim... onestli, im hurted


No, seriously, what has triggered this thread? I don't find the English on this board to be that lousy. Why can't you just accept that everyone in the world is not fluent in English? The important thing is that we understand each other, and I sometimes find the quibbling of English-speaking posters even more annoying than poor English.
We can't all be bothered to learn your language to perfection, would you be bothered learning ours? No, right?

...

Errors in English by foreigners doesn't annoy me at all. It's the basic mistakes by native English speakers that get me, as shown by my thread a while ago. The difference between "your" and "you're" really is not that hard to grasp.

 

[jpowers]

Originally posted by insurgent
Why can't you just accept that everyone in the world is not fluent in English?

Sorry if I gave the impression that non-native speakers were targeted, but my real peeve is that so-called native English speakers make these mistakes just as frequently as foreigners. If English is your second (thrid, fourth, whatever) language, just realize that you probably speak more correctly than 50% of Americans.

 

[insurgent]

Oh, well, it's common for people not to speak their own native tongue very well. Most Danes don't, and I don't think that's something special for neither Denmark nor the English-speaking world.
But if you're talking about native English speakers, then you must excuse me...

 

[Crazy Eddie]

People mixing up "there" and "their" annoys me. I shouldn't complain, my grammar isn't too good sometimes.

 

[gr8ful wes]

is "aint" a word yet?

 

[Maj]

Growing up I was taught "lose" is the opposite of "win" and "loose" is the opposite of "tight". Loose and lose are not interchangeable. But lately I've been seeing a lot of people spelling "lose" as "loose". Sometimes even the a newspaper column has words to the extent of "you have nothing to loose".

Can you spell "lose" as "loose" or is that a spelling mistake that has somehow permeated what I believed to be the inpenetrable editors.

These are the most common malaprops I come across.

you're, your

there, their, they're

its, it's

I remember at one time the NBA was promoting literacy with TV advertisments. They had their slogan all nicely displayed in the center with these smaller words below it: "Brought to you by the National Basketball Association and it's partners".

And to all of you who speak English as a second language: I hold a deep respect for those who are able to learn and apply one helluva a tough language.

 

[JollyRoger]

"Compassionate" is not an appropriate modifier of "Conservative"

 

[Dralix]

Originally posted by Maj
Can you spell "lose" as "loose" or is that a spelling mistake that has somehow permeated what I believed to be the inpenetrable editors.

The problem with spell checkers is that they will only check that the collection of letters is a valid word. So the phrase "nothing to loose" would pass the spell check. A grammar check on the other hand, may or may not catch this. I've seen Word's grammar check flag homonyms and say basically "are you sure you have the right word."

 

[Padma]

Originally posted by Maj
Growing up I was taught "lose" is the opposite of "win" and "loose" is the opposite of "tight". Loose and lose are not interchangeable. But lately I've been seeing a lot of people spelling "lose" as "loose". Sometimes even the a newspaper column has words to the extent of "you have nothing to loose".

Can you spell "lose" as "loose" or is that a spelling mistake that has somehow permeated what I believed to be the inpenetrable editors.

The editors *are* penetrable.

You are correct in your definitions. They are spelled differently, and pronounced differently. Yet both are "legal" words, so a spell-checker won't catch the mistake, and most grammar checkers won't, either.

 

[Maj]

You are correct in your definitions. They are spelled differently, and pronounced differently. Yet both are "legal" words, so a spell-checker won't catch the mistake, and most grammar checkers won't, either.

But I thought the editors were the final spell checkers. I've seen the mistake in a single article more than once, making me believe it was actually a correct form of the word. I've read books and articles with mistakes that have made it by the editor, but never have I seen the same mistake pass twice or more in one piece, except for "loose" as "lose".

Oh well. Like you said, editors ain't perfect.

 

[cgannon64]

Originally posted by JollyRoger
"Compassionate" is not an appropriate modifier of "Conservative"

I can't tell if this was intended as a joke or not, but it reminds me of an SNL skit. "Compassionate conservity" and "compassionitivity"...and "strategery".

CG