Phrases That Make Me Cringe. Bit of a Rant.

[Unseen]

I want to crawl up the wall when I hear people (the younger they are, the more likely they are to) use variations on "to go" in place of "to say."

EXAMPLE: "She goes, 'Well, I know how to get there without your help,' so I went 'I don't think you do!'"

[Larry F]

My 1962 Webster's has forte as fort and flaccid as flacksid. What is the world coming to? I mean, to what is the world coming?

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by Jackson Jackson

No I don't believe it's just a colloquialism, It's misuse of a word. Why say literally, if you don't mean literally?

I would say "The soup was so spicy, I felt like my mouth was on fire!"

That's just the point. Colloquialisms are by their nature exceptions, otherwise we wouldn't call them colloquialisms. They would be invisible, so to speak, like plain everyday language devoid of special expressions. So, it's not a sign of ignorance but of with familiarity with how everyday language functions.

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by Larry F

My 1962 Webster's has forte as fort and flaccid as flacksid. What is the world coming to? I mean, to what is the world coming?

I grew up "knowing" that "flaccid" got the "ks" sound, but misuse becomes acceptable after a while. There are many examples of this phenomenon. "Ain't" used to be the classic example of the most abysmal sort of linguistic ignorance, but now very well educated people simply use it as a form of not that is both flippant and and expresses a high degree of determination: "AIN'T gonna do it!" A lot of black street talk has gone mainstream.

[Charlie Bernstein]

Originally Posted by casterway

Orientate is in the dictionary. I looked it up. It said 'the same as orient.'

Yup, but so are irregardless, flammable, and preventative. They're still terrific words to avoid.

Some great ones have already been mentioned - good work, crew! High on my list: myself, when used as a substitute for me or I: She bought shots for Elmo and myself. Francesca and myself played some hot solos.

People use it because they're not sure whether me or I is right. But if they stuck to one or the other, they'd be right half the time, anyway, instead of flunking every time. And they'd look a lot less insecure.

And how hard is it to get it right? If she bought a shot for me, she can probably afford to buy shots for Elmo and me. And if I played some hot solos, why couldn't Francesca and I?

It's just laziness.

And speaking of laziness, I'm firmly in the anti-awesome camp. There really is no excuse for using it. It just makes people - even smart people - sound dumb. It's completely lost its meaning and its power and has long since been reduced to the place-saver status of um, like, and you know.

If you want be taken seriously by anyone outside your own SCOF, lose it.

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by dean

A couple of the usage errors that bugged me throughout my tenure as an English teacher showed up quite often in students' writing. I never did come to terms with "All of the sudden." It kills me just to type it!

And another one that makes me cringe is the substitution of the pronoun "that" for the pronoun "who." E.g., "He is the person that bought the '52 Tele." Nope - it should be "He is the person who bought the '52 Tele." The rule is that when you are referring to a person, a form of the pronoun "who" is used. When referring to a place, thing, or idea, the pronoun "that" is used. Actually, this tiny error has appeared in a few of the posts on this thread.

It's pretty interesting which little speech mannerisms get under our skins!

Dean

I've always wondered about people who use "that" in place of "who." When do they imagine one would use "who," then? Would they say "Hand me the hammer WHO is on the table"?

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by dobrodoc

Corporate-speak in general. Taking ANY word, and making a verb out of it, as the aforementioned "dialoging." And along with "awesome," must come "extreme." Saying, I met with," instead of, "I talked to." And the two I hate worst:
"You see what I'm saying?"
"Arguably, the best..."

I'm an old guy, so I cringe at unisexing words that used to have connotations as to the gender of the person. I hate "flight attendant" and much prefer "stewardess" or "steward." Likewise, "food server" sounds forced to me whereas "waitress" and "waiter" sound much better to my ears and less a construct of a society obsessed with political correctness. None of those gender specific terms bring up any negative connotations as far as I can tell.

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by Dean R Gray

I don't know if this is happening in the U.S.A., but over here there has been a change in the way a television network announces the company that has sponsored a particular program.

e.g. "This program .........brought to you by (Ford Australia/Coca Cola/whoever)

Well.. This program IS brought, this program WAS brought? Which is it?

I don't have a college education but it seems to me this is not a complete sentence. The advertisor saves a few dollars by not having to record two commercials, one for broadcast during the program, and one for afterwards, and the entire population becomes a little bit dumber as a result!

This one does annoy me, because it is intentional misuse of language, broadcast to the public, by people who should know better, for the purpose of saving money.

There, I feel better now!

Is there a little pause in there somewhere allowing you to fill in some unspoken words? I think, like a lot of expressions, this is what you'd call "elliptical" with implied or understood language which isn't state, but makes sense of the phrasing.

[JKjr]

Where's Yogi Bear hiding at? I'm in the Nile.

[Charlie Bernstein]

Originally Posted by Unseen

Would they say "Hand me the hammer WHO is on the table"?

Exactly! A person is a who. A hammer is a what.

Also interesting: the difference between which and that.

Give me the hammer, which is on the table - means there's one hammer, and you'll find it on the table.

Give me the hammer that is on the table - means there's more the one, and the one on the table is the one you want.

Which gets a comma in front of it, that doesn't. (Just thinking about this stuff puts me in a comma...)

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by giginthesky

"what have you". i was at a meeting years ago and this woman was speaking. she was using that term so much that, halfway through, i started counting. i lost track after 52. wtf does "what have you" mean anyhow? oh well, counting how many times she said it kept me awake through the meeting.

In a similar vein, I'm hearing "and whatnot" quite frequently lately. This is a word that I think was about to be thrown onto the trash heap of linguistic history. Obviously, I know what it means, but not by parsing it. If you try to parse it based on the component words, you come up empty-handed.

[Charlie Bernstein]

Originally Posted by Dean R Gray

"This program .........brought to you by (Ford Australia/Coca Cola/whoever)

Well.. This program IS brought, this program WAS brought? Which is it?

If it's not over yet, it is brought. If it just ended, it was brought, unless the same sponsor brings it all the time. Then it still is brought, because the sponsor will continue to bring it.

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by Telarkaster

...the use of the word "effect" instead of "affect". I always thought "effect" was a noun and "affect" was a verb, but what do I know. Language is in a constant state of flux...

Actually both of them can function as a noun or a verb:

"The EFFECT was instantaneous." NOUN (meaning RESULT in this sentence)
"They EFFECTED a change in procedure" VERB (meaning BRING ABOUT here)
"He spoke with a strange AFFECT." NOUN (meaning an ACCENT or IDIOSYNCRACY)
"He AFFECTED a British accent." VERB (meaning something like ADOPT, MIMIC, or FEIGN)

and they long have had both functions.

[Larry F]

Originally Posted by dobrodoc

"You see what I'm saying?"

When I lived in Chicago, I heard South-siders use the expression, "you know what I'm saying?" a lot. I also hear that in blues, not in words, but in the rhythm, pitch and contour. In the C blues, it would be the note C on the word "know" and the note Eb gliding up to just lower than E natural on the word "saying." In speech, the phrase is a toss-off. Same in a guitar solo. Once I made the connection, I heard and appreciation the expression in a new way.

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by e-merlin

Whenever I read or hear something like that, it makes me want to grab a bat and beat 'em like a baby seal!

I think we've seen the birth of a new colloquialism: "to beat someone like a baby seal."

I like it!

[Charlie Bernstein]

Originally Posted by Unseen

I want to crawl up the wall when I hear people (the younger they are, the more likely they are to) use variations on "to go" in place of "to say."

EXAMPLE: "She goes, 'Well, I know how to get there without your help,' so I went 'I don't think you do!'"

I hear "I'm like," "he's like," and "she's like" a lot more often: "She's like, 'No way!,' and I'm like, 'Oh my God, shut UP!'"

This is symptomatic of severely stunted verbal development (ref. awesome).

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by e-merlin

How about "coming down the pipe" instead of "coming down the pike?"

Yes, it brings up some very unpleasant images when you say "coming down the pipe."

[e-merlin]

Originally Posted by Charlie Bernstein

Yup, but so are irregardless, flammable, and preventative. They're still terrific words to avoid.

Does it bother anyone that flammable and inflammable mean the same thing?

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by Charlie Bernstein

Some great ones have already been mentioned - good work, crew! High on my list: myself, when used as a substitute for me or I: She bought shots for Elmo and myself. Francesca and myself played some hot solos.

People who use "me" (used when one is the recipient of action, typically announced by a pronoun like "to," "from," "toward," "at," etc.) instead of "I" just sound so ignorant. And, ironically, I know some very intelligent people who do it.

In fact, they do it with other personal pronouns as well: "Her and me went to the airport to pick up David" is a typical example. I wonder, does the perfectly correct "She and I (or, better, "we") went to the airport to pick up David" hurt her ears or sound vaguely incorrect?

Inquiring minds want to know!

[David Barnett]

Originally Posted by Unseen

I want to crawl up the wall when I hear people (the younger they are, the more likely they are to) use variations on "to go" in place of "to say."

EXAMPLE: "She goes, 'Well, I know how to get there without your help,' so I went 'I don't think you do!'"

Or, worse, "She was like, 'Well, I know how to get there without your help,' so I was like 'I don't think you do!'"


edit--- someone else beat me to it, and there's no delete function here, damnit.

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by Charlie Bernstein

I hear "I'm like," "he's like," and "she's like" a lot more often: "She's like, 'No way!,' and I'm like, 'Oh my God, shut UP!'"

This is symptomatic of severely stunted verbal development (ref. awesome).

I hear that, too, and it's even worse than the "go" instead of "says" thing.

[David Barnett]

Originally Posted by Unseen

I'm an old guy, so I cringe at unisexing words that used to have connotations as to the gender of the person. I hate "flight attendant" and much prefer "stewardess" or "steward." Likewise, "food server" sounds forced to me whereas "waitress" and "waiter" sound much better to my ears and less a construct of a society obsessed with political correctness. None of those gender specific terms bring up any negative connotations as far as I can tell.

At least the word "waitron" never caught on. The Jacques Derrida crowd were pushing that one back in the 1990s.