Natasmai · 56-60
I try not to be pedantic, but 'could of', 'should of', and 'would of' really get my goat.
View 1 more replies »
AndysAttic · 56-60, M

SW-User Best Comment
I can't imagine a scenario where someone would benefit from hating language that doesn't conform to a predetermined set of rules. Letting the behavior of others bother oneself is a flaw, not a strength.
Thodsis · 51-55, M
@SW-User That's a very good point. My bad. ;)
RedBaron · M
@SW-User It’s not necessarily a matter of hatred or any specific emotion.
That’s your interpretation.
That’s your interpretation.
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
Americans love back formations and have for a very long time. And if it makes for a longer multi-syllabic word so much the better. The one that i think is weirdest is burglarized when English already had burgled.
bijouxbroussard · F
@ninalanyon I was rolling my eyes at morons who say "conversate" when "converse" already exists and is more concise. 🙄

SW-User
I'm not overly fussy about it. I believe that the purpose of language is to be understood and if that is achieved then the job is done. I see no need for being pedantic about language used in social settings. I would be more concerned with the inappropriate use of language in formal settings.
Queendragonfly · 31-35, F
Oh my bad. I'm gifting real nice presents this year, I'm also not currently eating healthy. Happy Wednesday! 😀
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
@Queendragonfly That reminds me. Omitting commas and semicolons is one of my pet peeves.
Thodsis · 51-55, M
SunshineGirl · 36-40, F
I don't like any of those examples. But I'm not pedantic when talking to people. So long as I roughly understand what is being said, that is good enough for me.
TheOneyouwerewarnedabout · 46-50, MVIP
I’m not a mass debater..
But I’m a cunning linguist… 🤔
But I’m a cunning linguist… 🤔
Tell some people you were masticating and you might raise a few eyebrows!
Thodsis · 51-55, M
@soar2newhighs It depends on how you chews to phrase it...
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
@soar2newhighs Particularly if it leads to logorrhea.
Thodsis · 51-55, M
@LordShadowfire What a lovely word!
ArishMell · 70-79, M
My list starts with gratuitous crudities......!
The phrase "grammar nazi", which is as foolish and ignorant as it is tasteless, but implies it is wrong to take a pride in reasonable fluency and literacy in one's own language.
Muddled adjectives and adverbs (as your "eating healthy" example), and nouns and verbs (e.g. "the daily commute", "a new build" ).
Using "like" where no comparison or example exists. Does "I'm like..." mean "I'm not certain what I am"?
Clumsy, ugly suffices based on "ise" (or "ize" if you're American, reminding us of a well-known past make of toilet-paper one could use as tracing-paper). E,g., the word is "inspiring", not that awful "inspir-ayshun-ull".
Affectations such as using Americanisms and American spellings when neither American nor resident in the USA. (This is not a new trend. Two hundred and more years ago English speakers sometimes affected French or Latin words.) I except genuine technical terms for American inventions like the "transistor"; but do not accept American terms for things not invented there. That includes the names of the French-invented, Metric measurement units. One or two US spellings even unwittingly alter the meaning completely, by ignoring the etymology!
Affectations beloved of business people trying to sound clever. Many started as an individual's bright metaphor but have become cliches tarnished to death: "going forward", "identifying a requirement for", "blue skies thinking" etc. Or the politicians' equivalents: "hard-working families" and such-like.
Ignoring tenses - historians talking about long-past events, or novellists writing narratives, in the Present Tense. Also weather forecasters using the Present Tense for the days ahead.
The phrase "grammar nazi", which is as foolish and ignorant as it is tasteless, but implies it is wrong to take a pride in reasonable fluency and literacy in one's own language.
Muddled adjectives and adverbs (as your "eating healthy" example), and nouns and verbs (e.g. "the daily commute", "a new build" ).
Using "like" where no comparison or example exists. Does "I'm like..." mean "I'm not certain what I am"?
Clumsy, ugly suffices based on "ise" (or "ize" if you're American, reminding us of a well-known past make of toilet-paper one could use as tracing-paper). E,g., the word is "inspiring", not that awful "inspir-ayshun-ull".
Affectations such as using Americanisms and American spellings when neither American nor resident in the USA. (This is not a new trend. Two hundred and more years ago English speakers sometimes affected French or Latin words.) I except genuine technical terms for American inventions like the "transistor"; but do not accept American terms for things not invented there. That includes the names of the French-invented, Metric measurement units. One or two US spellings even unwittingly alter the meaning completely, by ignoring the etymology!
Affectations beloved of business people trying to sound clever. Many started as an individual's bright metaphor but have become cliches tarnished to death: "going forward", "identifying a requirement for", "blue skies thinking" etc. Or the politicians' equivalents: "hard-working families" and such-like.
Ignoring tenses - historians talking about long-past events, or novellists writing narratives, in the Present Tense. Also weather forecasters using the Present Tense for the days ahead.
RedBaron · M

AndysAttic · 56-60, M
'Should off', 'could off'...winds me up.
ArtieKat · M
Guilty as charged, m'lud!
calicuz · 56-60, M
"I'm down"
bijouxbroussard · F
"My bad" is AA slang. But I knew we were lost when I heard a white tv anchor saying it.
CountScrofula · 41-45, M
I really hate corporate language which uses tortured ornament in how things are described to make boring shit sound more impressive.
Slang is slang. Language must evolve and so much of that evolution is breaking and reforming grammatical rules. May as well argue with the tide.
Slang is slang. Language must evolve and so much of that evolution is breaking and reforming grammatical rules. May as well argue with the tide.
Picklebobble2 · 56-60, M
I think i'm just grateful
all of the sudden
has died a death
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
It occurs to me this is a great place to leave this video:
https://youtu.be/-FdKPEA17m4?si=CITn74JGgNwrXJy9
https://youtu.be/-FdKPEA17m4?si=CITn74JGgNwrXJy9
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
I'm not that much of a pedant, but I'm enough of one to know there's a difference between casual grammar and formal grammar.
Technically speaking, we might not like the verbing of certain words that are traditionally nouns, but it's not actually improper grammar.
Technically speaking, we might not like the verbing of certain words that are traditionally nouns, but it's not actually improper grammar.