Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations strongm on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

2008 Season Opener for: "Irritating Words and Expressions" 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

SantaMufasa

Technical User
Jul 17, 2003
12,588
US
As several have requested, this thread puts to bed the old, longer-than-comfortable thread that has a similar title.

<soap box>

My Pet Peeve of verbal irritation is the seemingly universal abuse of pronouns on either side of any form/conjugation/tense of the verb infinitive, "to be".

This verb is unique in that it implies equality. As we know from maths class, "If A = B, then B = A". In English, this correlates to "If A is B, then B is A". This implies that if we use pronouns on either side of any usage of the verb "to be", the pronouns should be nominative/subjective, not objective.

Specifically, when we use "to be", pronouns should be subjective: I, he, she, we, they; not objective: me, him, her, us, them.

Abuse: It's me.
Correction: It's I.
Reverse to prove: "I am it."; not "Me am it."

Abuse: The winners should be us.
Correction: The winners should be we.
Reverse to prove: "We should be the winners."; not "Us should be the winners."

Abuse: The most qualified is her.
Correction: The most qualified is she.
Reverse to prove: "She is the most qualified."; not "Her is the most qualified."

Sammy Davis Jr. Lyric abuse: "I've Gotta Be Me."
Less poetic correction: "I Must Be I".
Reverse to prove: "I must be I"; not "Me have got to be I."

So, let's please always use subjective/nominative pronouns when using any form/conjucation/tense of the infinitive, "to be".

</soap box>



[santa]Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[I provide low-cost, remote Database Administration services: www.dasages.com]
 
@Prognewb
Luckily, I can't say I hear people use those often at all.
If they did, I might snap.
I am already at the point of correcting people when they tell me that "I seen it".
Don't usually correct people either since, hey, I knew what they meant. But if they seen it, then I just may break down and blurt out "saw". I would like to think their instant acknowledgement of my one word response indicates they knew better in the first place ...

~
Chuck Norris is the reason Waldo is hiding.
 
CabunCenturion said:
You're assuming facts not in evidence.

Quote (risgy):
I didn't say "iff" and I didn't say "all".

No one said you did. But it's interesting that you are assuming that "if" means "if" when you say it, but "iff" when another speaks it.
You seem to know a lot about what I'm assuming ...

and it's Risby not risgy fer chrisakes

==========================================
toff.jpg
I phoned the local ramblers club today, and this bloke just went on and on.
 
SantaMufasa said:
...and you (Risby) don't seem to have a problem conforming to the strict syntactical prescriptions of AWK, C, C++, Perl, and Unix.

but, but, but I already made a big deal about not being able to treat computer languages and natural languages in the same way ... just up there

==========================================
toff.jpg
I phoned the local ramblers club today, and this bloke just went on and on.
 
I do apologize for misspelling your name.


--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read
FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
 
Back to the original subject:

Webification
Grrr...

Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo.

 
Another couple of verbal peeves:

[ul][li]"Ec cetera" instead of "et cetera", and[/li][li]"Aks"...as when someone wants to "Aks me a question".[/li][/ul]

[santa]Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[I provide low-cost, remote Database Administration services: www.dasages.com]
 
Perhaps what they really mean is that they have an axe to grind with you. [wink]

--

"If to err is human, then I must be some kind of human!" -Me
 
Just ... can't ... stop ... myself

OK look, as we all know the current English work "ask" is derived from Old English "ascian" ("axian/acsian" were both in use).

"aks" comes from middle English and "ask" is modern English.

"aks" was still widely used in England during the European/American slave trade period. It is called a metathesis but it metathesized from "aks" to "ask", not vice-versa.

==========================================
toff.jpg
Promulgate sesquipedalianism!
 
Hmm, that's purty interesting. If true, I think I'll start saying "aks", and if someone aks me 'bout it, I'll just say I'm old-fashioned.
[wink]

--

"If to err is human, then I must be some kind of human!" -Me
 
Whilst we're here, can we forever ban the following:

1. I was like walking and he was like...
2. person a: I've seen a shirt that would really suit you!
person b: Is it?
3. I turned around to him and I said
4. Irregardless

[soapbox]

climbing off now...

Fee

"The cure for anything is salt water – sweat, tears, or the sea." Isak Dinesen
 
But Fee ... people use language to communicate. They communicate so much more than merely the literal definition of the words in a mechanistic way.

When people append "init" or "is it" tags they are not asking questions any more than "How do you do" is meant as a question. Use of specific phrases is a means of identifying yourself with a certain group.

By abjuring such phrases you are (like :) identifying yourself with a different group or perhaps expressing distaste for the group that uses the phrases.

However, irregardless is just plain wrong, wrong, wrong ...

==========================================
toff.jpg
Promulgate sesquipedalianism!
 
There is a lady here at work who starts off with ... or interrupts her own sentences with "and she said" or "and i said" whenever talking about somebody's conversation.

It is almost like her mental pause instead of using the words "uh", "um", or "like".

I want to make fun of her every time she leaves the room but that would be mean -_- so I don't.

I think this is fastly approacing the annoyance level of the verbal pause "uh" and "um" for me.


"She said I know what you are talking about and she said but you really should do it that way."

~
Chuck Norris is the reason Waldo is hiding.
 
You know, like irregardless of all the irritating expressions and words, I be just fine and happy, seriously?
[wink]

--

"If to err is human, then I must be some kind of human!" -Me
 
You know, like irregardless of all the irritating expressions and words, I be just fine and happy, seriously?
That sounds like the descriptionist motto. :)


--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read
FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
 
But the response to "I've seen a shirt that would be just your colour" cannot be 'Is it?". It must be "Have you?".

That's a push too far for me to accept.

Fee

"The cure for anything is salt water – sweat, tears, or the sea." Isak Dinesen
 
Opieo said:
I think this is fastly approacing the annoyance level of the verbal pause "uh" and "um" for me.
Could you please confirm the meaning you intended there for fastly?

[santa]Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[I provide low-cost, remote Database Administration services: www.dasages.com]
 
CajunCenturion said:
descriptionist
I prescribe the word "descriptivist" in any future references.

descriptivists


==========================================
toff.jpg
abjure hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia
 
willif said:
That's a push too far for me to accept.
init though

==========================================
toff.jpg
abjure hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia
 
and, just to prove I'm paying attention
kjv1611 said:
and happy, seriously
oxymoron alert

==========================================
toff.jpg
abjure hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia
 

But the response to "I've seen a shirt that would be just your colour" cannot be 'Is it?". It must be "Have you?".
Fee, I would probably interpret it like this:

"I've seen a shirt that would be just your colour"
"Have you really seen it (or just need to say anything at all)?"

vs.

"I've seen a shirt that would be just your colour"
"But is it really a color that would suit me? You think so (or you just have no idea what color would suit me)?"

:-D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top