Not a word, whoever it is...
Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
So, steev, is your point that irregardless "has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so?"
That's just mean. Posted by enochville (Member # 8815) on :
Another blunder that bugs me is "for all intensive purposes". Hahaha
Posted by Steev (Member # 6805) on :
The word "ignorant" I thought being used incorrectly to mean being rude to someone was a Utah/Idaho thing. But apparently out here on the eastern shore of Maryland/Virginia they use it like that too.
Posted by jennabean (Member # 8590) on :
MEAN GIRLS!
Posted by Steev (Member # 6805) on :
Oh, and the word "especially" being pronounced incorrectly as if it had an "x" in it as in "ex-pecially".
That’s really silly.
Posted by Steev (Member # 6805) on :
Evidently the word "unthaw" has now become to mean the opposite of its root parts. "un-thaw"
That was a great sketch, notwithstanding the fact that Horatio couldn't stop laughing at himself. As usual...
People do, however, need to figure out how to properly use "myself."
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
*bump*
Posted by Nell Gwyn (Member # 8291) on :
*snickers* Unthaw is a synonym of unfreeze now? Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Like the word 'literally'.
Which has come to mean 'figuratively' just through the way people use it.
Language is weird.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
Okay, the unthaw one is just confusing.
Posted by WntrMute (Member # 7556) on :
This is a mute point.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by Steev: The word "ignorant" I thought being used incorrectly to mean being rude to someone was a Utah/Idaho thing. But apparently out here on the eastern shore of Maryland/Virginia they use it like that too.
Where on the Eastern Shore? I went to college in Salisbury, parent's live in OC, and fiance is from a town near Centerville. I'm a chicken necker myself.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
No, it's a moo point.
Posted by peterh (Member # 5208) on :
Weather or not the ground is going to literally unthaw is a mute point. Expecially since it's going to snow irregardless of what we say or do.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
That should be "or due."
Gee whiz.
Posted by peterh (Member # 5208) on :
Oh, how I want to go back and edit that post now...
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
Help! Help! I'm being chased by an Ask Murderer!
Posted by peterh (Member # 5208) on :
An Ask! That's the urban question weapon of choice.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote:Originally posted by enochville: Another blunder that bugs me is "for all intensive purposes". Hahaha
*rips hair out* Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Nobody has addressed the question that I started this thread with.
Does anybody know who Irregardless is? Is (s)he an alt for an older member? I'm thinking (s)he is, but I'm not positive.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
My grammar irritation is that people can't seem to understand that an object (him, her, me, us) is still an object when preceeded by the word "and". It drives I crazy!
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
I've never been particularly fond of "I could care less." I also get that queasy feeling every time I hear "bug" used as an intransitive verb. And I think "definately" may be my least favorite misspelling, in part because I fear it will become an accepted variant.
--Pop
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
Porter, the more intensely you pursue the question, the more intensely it will be derailed. That leads me to believe that somebody doesn't want it answered.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
One thing that makes me shudder is when people use acronyms and still add on the word that one of the letters in the acronym represents. For example:
NIC: Network interface card People say NIC card all the time. Network interface card... card?
VIN: Vehicle identification number People say VIN number all the time when VIN number is: Vehicle identification number... number?
People drive me nuts.
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
Add to that list:
ATM Machine (I've seen so many signs that say this...drives me INSANE!) PIN number
I worked for a credit union for a while, organizing old files of correspondence. One letter included the following:
Please change my PIN Number # to XXXX.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
When the acronym becomes a word, people stop thinking about what it stands for. And you’ve got to admit, “PIN number” and “ATM machine” are less technical sounding and much more self-explanatory. It’s all part of not confusing Grandma. “The ATM will prompt you for your PIN.” What’s an ATM? Is that the new word for the bank teller? And is a PIN something I should have in my purse?
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
I admit nothing, other than the fact that "ATM machine" is like nails on a chalkboard for me.
Maybe it's all part of not confusing Grandma, but that doesn't mean it doesn't drive me insane.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
That's the sort of thing that would normally bother me, but in this case it doesn't for some reason.
ATM machine and PIN number, even though they're redundant, are alright with me.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
I hear ya, Megan.
My own personal chalkboard scraper: when somebody says “6 a.m. in the morning.” That definately bugs.
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
*ack*
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
Opps sorry Pops
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
Yeah, that's obnoxious, too. I guess everyone's got their personal grammatical bugbears.
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
Just a little jarring for me to see that before 10 a.m. in the morning is all.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I don't like where this is heading.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
I could care less.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Supposably the repitition of information makes communication clearer.
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
Supposably the repitition of information makes communication clearer.
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
*twitches*
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I have no idea what you are saying, Papa.
Posted by SenojRetep (Member # 8614) on :
I think Irregardless is mph. I'll repeat that if you think it'll make it clearer.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
Maybe this thread should be renamed the "I hate tunafish and redundancy and tunafish thread."
I've always been irked by graemlins, and to a lesser extent, using asterisks to mark some kind of emote, like this:
*ducks, covers, and waits whimpering for the inevitable slew of graemlins and emotes*
Also, the word irk. Man, that's bothersome.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
And people with the letter 'x' in their screenname.
Man, that really sticks in my claw. Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: Like the word 'literally'.
Which has come to mean 'figuratively' just through the way people use it.
Actually, it hasn't. The other meaning of "literally" is confined to hyperbolic uses.
Also: there's nothing wrong with "ATM machine" or "PIN number" (especially now than non-numeric PINs are common), any more than there's anything wrong with "the almanac." (Or "the alcohol," "the hoi polloi," or "the Rio Grande River," among many other examples.)
Edited to add: and "I should care less" is a sarcastic idiom, and not the least bit problematic. (See also: the even less logical "head over heels.")
Edited again to note that I meant to type "I could care less." Oops.
[ January 25, 2006, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: Shmuel ]
Posted by theCrowsWife (Member # 8302) on :
"hot water heater"
Why do you need to heat the water if it's already hot?
--Mel
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
"Edited to add: and "I should care less" is a sarcastic idiom, and not the least bit problematic."
Except when "I could care less" isn't being said sarcastically, and the person saying it doesn't even realize it should be "I couldn't care less."
The only acronyms that bother me are the ones with profanity in them that become so accepted that anyone will say them anywhere. It really drove me crazy when President Clinton used the word "SNAFU" in one of his televised speeches.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
Oh, and my pet peeve: grocery express checkout lanes reading "10 items or fewer." Too fussy; "less" is a perfectly respectable modifier. (On the other hand, "10 items or less" satisfies me but horrifies those of the Miss Thistlebottom persuasion. "Up to 10 items" can be construed as imposing a limit of 9. The only safe choice may be "no more than 10 items," which is too wordy. The solution? Abolish express lanes. They're not very useful anyway.)
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
We are like a whole forum of Strunks and Whites.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
In polite company, the "F" in "SNAFU" stands for "fouled."
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote: On the other hand, "10 items or less" satisfies me but horrifies those of the Miss Thistlebottom persuasion.
Count me as dissapproving rather than horrified.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tante Shvester: Help! Help! I'm being chased by an Ask Murderer!
Is he a cereal killer?
Posted by Boon (Member # 4646) on :
::minces cheerios with a butcher knife::
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Actually, it hasn't. The other meaning of "literally" is confined to hyperbolic uses.
When's the last time you heard someone say "literally" when they meant it literally?
Everytime I hear someone say it they mean "figuratively".
Here's an interesting article discussing that phenomenon, among others.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:When's the last time you heard someone say "literally" when they meant it literally?
That's the only way I use it, and I use it frequently.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang:
quote:Actually, it hasn't. The other meaning of "literally" is confined to hyperbolic uses.
When's the last time you heard someone say "literally" when they meant it literally?
Everytime I hear someone say it they mean "figuratively".
Here's an interesting article discussing that phenomenon, among others.
Every example given in that article is a hyperbolic (or as its author puts it, "intensified") usage. "Figuratively" is a more general term.
Although, to take your question at face value, I encounter both meanings pretty often.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
I use the word literally all the time.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I haven't heard it used any way but hyperbolic (in your words) in years. Which, of course, is how a word comes to mean something different than what it originally meant.
m_p_h, somehow I'm not surprised.
Posted by Brinestone (Member # 5755) on :
AFR: I laughed out loud at the delicious ambiguity in your post!
Posted by Steev (Member # 6805) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan:
quote:Originally posted by Steev: The word "ignorant" I thought being used incorrectly to mean being rude to someone was a Utah/Idaho thing. But apparently out here on the eastern shore of Maryland/Virginia they use it like that too.
Where on the Eastern Shore? I went to college in Salisbury, parent's live in OC, and fiance is from a town near Centerville. I'm a chicken necker myself.
I'm a transplant in Pocomoke City.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
I hate: 12:00 PM
and 12:00 AM
Posted by Steev (Member # 6805) on :
I prefer to say "noon o' clock" and "frickin' midnight".
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel: "the hoi polloi"
>_< ACK! NONONO! You say "the La Brea Tarpits" too, don't you? *glare*
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel: Oh, and my pet peeve: grocery express checkout lanes reading "10 items or fewer." Too fussy; "less" is a perfectly respectable modifier.
Clearly, you were just RAISED wrong. Has no one ever taught you the mnemonic "fewer donuts, less coffee"? If you can count it, modify with "fewer" NOT with "less"! And the whole point of those lanes is counting the items, neh? Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
It's amazing. Shmuel is wrong about literally everything. He's even worse than Elizabeth! ( )
Shmuel, you could save me much effort in 2008 by simply telling me for whom you are voting.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Well, he is right about the polite version of SNAFU. I didn't even know there was a more colorful version until I was in my teens, and I certainly knew the word. (And it has become a word, and not merely an acronym. It even is used as three different parts of speech! )
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
Thank y'all for giving me an alternative to put in my brain to replace what I always think - unwillingly - when I hear "SNAFU". Posted by Irregardless (Member # 8529) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Nobody has addressed the question that I started this thread with.
Does anybody know who Irregardless is? Is (s)he an alt for an older member? I'm thinking (s)he is, but I'm not positive.
Nope. I've been reading OSC's articles on Hatrack for quite a while, but I've never had another identity here.
So who are YOU?! Posted by Irregardless (Member # 8529) on :
(... though clearly, whatever poster I'm being mistaken for must be someone of great brilliance and charm.)
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
rivka, I was using literally figuratively. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Hyperbolically.
Or perhaps parabolically?
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:When's the last time you heard someone say "literally" when they meant it literally?
That's the only way I use it, and I use it frequently.
I am so not surprised.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:So who are YOU?! [Smile]
No one of consequence.
Thanks for answering, I.
JT and JB: Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
Heh heh. I didn't even see JT's post.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Yeah, well I saw you!
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
quote:You say "the La Brea Tarpits" too, don't you? *glare*
I don't see what the problem is with "the La Brea Tarpits," since in that case "La Brea" is a proper noun and therefore shouldn't be translated.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
The one that really gets me is "I could care fewer."
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold I hate: 12:00 PM
and 12:00 AM
And once more I respectfully disagree. Furthermore, if you would allow 12:01 PM and 12:01 AM, I would argue that this is an inconsistent position. (Unless you insist on 0:01 PM and 0:01 AM, in which case good luck with that.)
quote:Originally posted by rivka: ACK! NONONO! You say "the La Brea Tarpits" too, don't you? *glare*
If I ever had occasion to talk about them, I certainly would.
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Clearly, you were just RAISED wrong.
Entirely possible. Pity the people who hire me as a copyeditor. (Although I'm perfectly capable of applying rules I disagree with if such is mandated by a given client's style.)
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: Shmuel, you could save me much effort in 2008 by simply telling me for whom you are voting.
Depends who's running, but it might not help you. In the four presidential elections in which I've voted, I've chosen a major-party candidate exactly once. (Clinton, '96.)
Posted by Irregardless (Member # 8529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel:
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold I hate: 12:00 PM
and 12:00 AM
And once more I respectfully disagree. Furthermore, if you would allow 12:01 PM and 12:01 AM, I would argue that this is an inconsistent position.
Well, since PM and AM mean 'post (after) meridian' and 'ante (before) meridian', they wouldn't seem to apply at 12:00 because the sun is (theoretically) on the meridian.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
And yet 12:01 PM isn't twelve hours and one minute past noon... the term has moved on from its literal Latin meaning.
(Also, it's ante meridiem, not "meridian.")
Posted by Irregardless (Member # 8529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel: And yet 12:01 PM isn't twelve hours and one minute past noon... the term has moved on from its literal Latin meaning.
(Also, it's ante meridiem, not "meridian.")
OK, although the dictionary seems to recognize 'antemeridian', etc.
No one argues that 12:01 PM means twelve hours and one minute after noon, anymore than 10:14 AM means ten hours and 14 minutes before noon. It means that the time is 12:01, and (separately) that it is afternoon.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irregardless: No one argues that 12:01 PM means twelve hours and one minute after noon, anymore than 10:14 AM means ten hours and 14 minutes before noon. It means that the time is 12:01, and (separately) that it is afternoon.
That's a fair distinction. I withdraw my claim that your approach is inconsistent.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irregardless: Well, since PM and AM mean 'post (after) meridian' and 'ante (before) meridian', they wouldn't seem to apply at 12:00 because the sun is (theoretically) on the meridian.
It's this kind of logic that makes people become all apoplectic over usage. Languages seldom follow such exacting rules of logic, and there's really no reason why speakers of one language should follow the rules of another.
Posted by Ray Bingham (Member # 9006) on :
We need to "nip" <this thread> "in the butt"...
--Ray
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
The latin is irrelevant. The term is both nautical and astronomical. Navigators take a "noon reading" where they view a split image of the sun and the horizon. When the image of the sun appears to rise out of the horizon, the navigator calls out "Noon" and his Mate marks the time, in Greenwich time. This gives the meridian, or longitudinal position.
The meridian is also local noon. Not before or after.
Read "Bartelby the Scrivener" by Melville. The lawyer gives the time as 12:00 Meridian, rather than Noon.
As too how anyone decided whether 12:00 AM was midnight or noon, it's a matter of pure ignorance. There is no established value for either, so if someone tells you to "be there at 12:00 PM," you can show up at either Noon or Midnight.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
Riiiiight. Tried that much?
I always figured that by the time you finished saying "It's 12:00 AM", it was actually a few seconds after the stroke of 12, and therefore in the morning hours. Or vice versa.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
A thread from beyond the grave has come back to haunt us!
Actually, I find it really interesting to read stuff I wrote over two years ago. Some things have changed, but so much has stayed the same.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
My work, of course, has decided to block the way back machine. ::grumbles::
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
My current pet peave is the use of the word "grow" as a transative verb instead of "enlarge" or "expand". Everytime I hear it, its' like finger nails on a chalk board.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold: Read "Bartelby the Scrivener" by Melville. The lawyer gives the time as 12:00 Meridian, rather than Noon.
Because a 19th-century short story whose narrator uses language that's deliberately overwrought for his time is an appropriate guide for contemporary usage.
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold: As too how anyone decided whether 12:00 AM was midnight or noon, it's a matter of pure ignorance. There is no established value for either, so if someone tells you to "be there at 12:00 PM," you can show up at either Noon or Midnight.
The latest edition of the American Heritage Dictionary disagrees with you, stating unequivocally that "By definition, 12 A.M. denotes midnight, and 12 P.M. denotes noon," although they note that there are enough other people confused on the point "to make it advisable to use 12 noon and 12 midnight where clarity is required." (But note the latter usage is advised to avoid confusing the ignorant, not the reverse.)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Oh, are we playing dueling dictionaries? Because the Compact OED says:
quote:p.m.
• abbreviation after noon.
— ORIGIN from Latin post meridiem.
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
Maybe "Dueling Dictionaries" is the theme to a nerdy version of Deliverance... Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote:Riiiiight. Tried that much?
Yes, I have taken Noon readings. I'm not very good at it, but I've done it.
Oh, wait, you could be referring to showing up at midnight when someone says 12:00 AM, or PM.
No, I simply correct them by pointing out that there is no such thing.
As to any dictionary definition that allows for a convention that matches one with the other, this is tantamount to defining Pi as 3, or saying that the solstice is June 21. It might be close enough to describe it to most people, but it isn't true.
The meridian is a thing that is independant of some arbitrary definition. And while most people don't use it directly, time is still calibrated by taking a reading on the meridian. That's why we have leap seconds every few years. Communication satellites, etc. require that time be kept accurately.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
So you're saying that if I say "12 pm" instead of "12 noon," it's going to throw off communications satellites?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:As to any dictionary definition that allows for a convention that matches one with the other, this is tantamount to defining Pi as 3, or saying that the solstice is June 21. It might be close enough to describe it to most people, but it isn't true.
When dealing with how to call different times of day, I think "Is it useful" is a much more important question than "is it true".
Having a convention of whether 12:00 A.M. is noon or midnight is definitely useful.
I hope that saying this doesn't mean I have to turn in my hyperliterals anonymous card.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
"Having a convention of whether 12:00 A.M. is noon or midnight is definitely useful."
Why is it more useful than saying Noon or Midnight?
It seems to me that the only reason to "define" Noon as being 12:00 PM is because in their ignorance, people asked "Is Noon AM or PM?" It would have been more useful to explain that it is neither, because AM means before noon, and PM means after noon.
As it stands, there are plenty of people who see 12:00 AM written and can't remember which that's supposed to mean. How is it useful to add to that confusion?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Why is it more useful than saying Noon or Midnight?
Because digital clocks don't have a "Midnight" or "Noon" setting.
Another thought -- the entire minute of 12:00 in the middle of the day is actually after the exact moment of noon, which would be the precise moment it goes from 11:59 to 12:00. It actually makes sense to say that 12:00 noon is 12:00 P.M..
[ January 29, 2006, 10:16 PM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold: As it stands, there are plenty of people who see 12:00 AM written and can't remember which that's supposed to mean.
I have yet to meet such a person.
I think most people are aware that 12:00 AM isn't likely to precede 12:00:01 PM, which is what the alternative interpretation would demand.
As for why one would use AM or PM instead of midnight or noon, I should think that would be obvious: it provides a space-saving abbreviation and a standard format. One could design digital clocks that would display "NOON" instead of "12 PM," and one could create timetables in which a stream of AMs and PMs would be broken up by the occasional "Midnight," with an expanded column size to accomodate that, and one could even design computer forms that would accept "Noon" in a field asking for a starting time, but... well, if you think that's the way the world ought to operate, I don't think anything I say will convince you otherwise.
(I'm not even going to get into the matter of time zones -- a wholly pragmatic and relatively recent invention -- making the technical definition of noon entirely irrelevant.)
Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel: Oh, and my pet peeve: grocery express checkout lanes reading "10 items or fewer." Too fussy; "less" is a perfectly respectable modifier. (On the other hand, "10 items or less" satisfies me but horrifies those of the Miss Thistlebottom persuasion. "Up to 10 items" can be construed as imposing a limit of 9. The only safe choice may be "no more than 10 items," which is too wordy. The solution? Abolish express lanes. They're not very useful anyway.)
When can we expect your new book "Properties of Grocery Lanes"?
I'm going to copy that down somewhere. Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
Porter, I wouldn't worry too much. I think it's more hyperliteral to insist that since a.m. can't refer to midnight because of what it originally meant in Latin.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)