Like Fingernails On A Chalkboard....

[Mike4AU]

Just musing...Rooney style....

For those people who spell “lose” as “loose,” do they spell “loose” as “looose?”

There are a lot of people who spell “a lot” as “alot.” Would they spell “not a lot” as “notalot?”

If me and my friends are going to the beach, with whom would I go?

Next batter....

[woofersus]

The most maddening to me has always been the confusion of when to use the words "to" and "too." It should be simple, but for some reason they get swapped all the time.

A close second is the there/their/they're issue.

[Jason]

Color vs. Colour....or group vs groupe?
:poke::hide:





OK that was pretty bad...

[craigsub]

Or when a woman says "**** You !!" when she has no intentions of doing so. Yeah, that one really annoys me.

[dvenardos]

That begs the question instead of raises the question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begs_the_question

[SomeCiscoGuy]

I did good...it went good...

[craigsub]

I did good...it went good...

Does this mean she followed through on the F U ?

[Cujobob]

Or when a woman says "**** You !!" when she has no intentions of doing so. Yeah, that one really annoys me.

Never had that problem. Women have been good about following through. :greedy::greedy::nervous::nervous:

Most annoying for me has always been past and passed...it's simple when you think about it...but on the spot, it's puzzled me more than I care to admit.

[django1]

Seperates . Everybody wants seperates. Without further adieu (ado). On some other forums Columbia/Colombia.

[Ajax]

HAH! The way I remember that one is the old "there's A RAT in sepARATe."

[Stocky]

I'm a stickler for people that pronounce "across" and add a "t" to the end of it " acrosst" WTF is that ?

also people who say "you's " . We always get the waitress who opens with " do you's know what you want to order"

on the other hand I can't spell for the life of me .

[woofersus]

How about when people talk about how prodigious a speaker's "base" is, and they don't mean the plinth?

[Ajax]

It's difficult for me to keep out of this thread. I should begin by stating that I do not use the language perfectly. I often make mistakes and am capable of splitting an infinitive with the best of them. However, I've come to understand that misuse, malapropisms, and misspellings (either through ignorance or typing errors-Lord knows I make enough typos of my own) are an inherent part of the internet experience and I've sorta made peace with that fact.

But, these days, there are two language thingys that drive me to distraction.

[rant] The first is the fact that dictionaries consider their goal to be reflective, rather than corrective. In other words, the correct definition or pronunciation of a given word is decided by how the general public uses the word, rather than how it has been used over time. Unfortunately, this means our language is often defined by misuse, misspelling, and bad grammar.

Simple example, the word forte as meaning a person's strong point; that in which one excels: "I don't know what her forte is, but it's not music." The older and historical pronunciation of word is the one-syllable word that is pronounced the same as the word used to describe the thing that, as a child, you built in the backyard out of scrap pieces of wood or, on a rainy day, in the living room out of pillows and blankets (fort).

A two-syllable pronunciation (for-tay) is increasingly heard, perhaps owing to confusion with the musical term forte (for-tay) which means "loud." Both the one- and two-syllable pronunciations of forte are now considered standard. So, due to "confusion," the incorrect pronunciation is now acceptable.

The second is the misuse of the the word "of." Instead of the simpler, correct way of saying something such as "he is too good a player to make a mistake like that" or "it is too nice a day to stay indoors," the completely unnecessary and incorrect insertion of the word "of," as in "he is too good OF a player to make a mistake like that" or "it's too nice OF a day to stay indoors," will cause my skin to shift. I now hear it from people who should know better and soon it too will be considered acceptable.

I am all in favor of the language evolving, but at least let's make it simpler rather than more complicated. You will see me often type "gonna" instead of "going to" or "gotta" instead of "got to." Totally incorrect. However, such usage is not because of ignorance or "confusion." Doing it that way is simply easier to type and even say.

You wanna change the spelling of the word "through" to "thru?" I'm all in favor of it. (don't get me started on that whole "ough" thing (cough, rough, bough, through ) [/rant]

WHEW! :whew: I feel much better now. Thanks for listening while I blow off steam. :o

[wyliec2]

Using MUTE in place of MOOT - "It is a mute point"....arrgggghhhhhhhhhhh

Pronouncing nuclear as "nukular".........

[django1]

It's difficult for me to keep out of this thread. I should begin by stating that I do not use the language perfectly. I often make mistakes and am capable of splitting an infinitive with the best of them. However, I've come to understand that misuse, malapropisms, and misspellings (either through ignorance or typing errors-Lord knows I make enough typos of my own) are an inherent part of the internet experience and I've sorta made peace with that fact.

But, these days, there are two language thingys that drive me to distraction.

[rant] The first is the fact that dictionaries consider their goal to be reflective, rather than corrective. In other words, the correct definition or pronunciation of a given word is decided by how the general public uses the word, rather than how it has been used over time. Unfortunately, this means our language is often defined by misuse, misspelling, and bad grammar.

Simple example, the word forte as meaning a person's strong point; that in which one excels: "I don't know what her forte is, but it's not music." The older and historical pronunciation of word is the one-syllable word that is pronounced the same as the word used to describe the thing that, as a child, you built in the backyard out of scrap pieces of wood or, on a rainy day, in the living room out of pillows and blankets (fort).

A two-syllable pronunciation (for-tay) is increasingly heard, perhaps owing to confusion with the musical term forte (for-tay) which means "loud." Both the one- and two-syllable pronunciations of forte are now considered standard. So, due to "confusion," the incorrect pronunciation is now acceptable.

The second is the misuse of the the word "of." Instead of the simpler, correct way of saying something such as "he is too good a player to make a mistake like that" or "it is too nice a day to stay indoors," the completely unnecessary and incorrect insertion of the word "of," as in "he is too good OF a player to make a mistake like that" or "it's too nice OF a day to stay indoors," will cause my skin to shift. I now hear it from people who should know better and soon it too will be considered acceptable.

I am all in favor of the language evolving, but at least let's make it simpler rather than more complicated. You will see me often type "gonna" instead of "going to" or "gotta" instead of "got to." Totally incorrect. However, such usage is not because of ignorance or "confusion." Doing it that way is simply easier to type and even say.

You wanna change the spelling of the word "through" to "thru?" I'm all in favor of it. (don't get me started on that whole "ough" thing (cough, rough, bough, through ) [/rant]

WHEW! :whew: I feel much better now. Thanks for listening while I blow off steam. :o

Up here I have the opposite rant. With French there are a bunch of stodgy old men in Paris who determine spelling,definitions and correct usage. The result in Quebec is a very complicated written language that no one speaks. When you read it out loud it sounds unnatural and no one beyond French teachers has any chance of writing without mistakes.

I taught English as a second language for two years and spelling like "night", "thought", "knock" and stuff like that gave the students a hard time. However, once memorized they don't change. In French the "past participle" gave me f-----g fits. Vaguely stated, a word will have an "e" or/and an "s", or both, tagged on the end of it depending on a subtle relation to what comes before or, depending on something or other, after it:angry:.

I just looked up "participe passé". Here are the suject headers for what you need to know to not make any mistakes ( a few pages of rules ):
"Participe passé

Définition du participe passé
Règles générales de l'accord du participe passé
Attendu, compris, excepté, etc.
Ci-annexé, ci-joint, ci-inclus
Étant donné, mis à part, fini
Coûté, valu, pesé, etc.
Participe passé des temps surcomposés
Dit, cru, dû, pu, su, etc.
Participe passé et particule "l'"
Participe passé entre deux "que" ou entre "que" et "qui"
Participe passé précédé d'un collectif ou nom de fraction
Participe passé, accord avec un adverbe de quantité
Participe passé précédé de "en"
Participe passé des verbes impersonnels
Participe passé, accord avec l'antécédent du relatif
Participe passé suivi d'un infinitif
Participe passé des verbes pronominaux"

:dizzy: And then they complain that kids can't write anymore...

And just as a disclaimer, a lot of us probably don't write that much beyond forum stuff. Heck, I'm a carpenter...