<p>I’ve seen “surprize” or “surprized” for “surprise” too many times to count!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>from a post on another thread - this is copied from the Santa Clara University newspaper.</p>
<p>Why do people insist on using then for than?</p>
<p>Drives me crazy!!</p>
<p>baseballmom:</p>
<p>It seems that dictionaries–at least in the US–have decided to record common usage rather than “lay down the law” as to what constitutes proper usage. </p>
<p>I’ve seen a lot of adjectives turned into nouns with the addition of --ness when a noun already exists, as in the case of stupidness. I still don’t think that the fact that stupidness made it into the dictionary means that it’s right. </p>
<p>I also think that the original meaning of transpire–to leak out, to be revealed-- is more correct than to occur, even though it transpires that the latter meaning has been in use since the 19th century and is apparently more common that the original, 18th century meaning. But then, I’m old-fashioned.</p>
<p>Written and spoken: Anyways for anyway (this one drives me crazy - seems to be a common regional thing here).</p>
<p>Also, I was embarrassed to realize that I misspelled the word misspell in an email the other day,LOL! Anyone who knows me knows that my spelling mistakes are all mere typos! ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It drives me crazy, in writing, for anyone to write “different than” when the historical English idiom is “different from.” The word “different” is not in comparative degree, as all words commonly used with “than” are (at least etymologically). But of course even I SPEAK that way, because most people are less fussy in speech than they are in writing.</p>
<p>Yes, dictionaries record usage in this country, unlike in France where the Academie decides if something is a “word” or not. The English language is constantly changing, borrowing, redefining…and it is up to the writer to decide if a word is appropriate for the context in which it will be used. </p>
<p>In a formal essay, I would mark off for “stupidness” but in a short story, I could see a character using it (or thinking it.)</p>
<p>At the risk of coming across as a pedantic chandelier (see post #88), I agree with Tokenadult about being driven crazy by “different than.” For us poor non-native speakers of English, it is a conspiracy keep us perpetually confused.</p>
<p>mommusic;</p>
<p>If the goal of the short story is to record the words or thoughts of an ill-spoken character, then stupidness is appropriate. If not, then stupidity is the correct term.</p>
<p>Sorry if this was covered earlier but I didn’t see “advice” and “advise” on anyone’s list. This confusion is common for both parents and students on CC and it is my top pet peeve on the board.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“The problem with defending the purity of the English language is
that English is about as pure as a cribhouse wh**e. We don’t just
borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down
alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new
vocabulary." – James Nicoll</p>
<p>I apologize if this has been mentioned, and it isn’t technically related to spelling, but…I heard the tv weatherman tonight say the weather will be getting more mild in the next few days. Shouldn’t that be milder? </p>
<p>I’ve also heard, from younger people, “funner” being used. Doesn’t get much worse than that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think you mipselled “Doesn’t get worser than that.”</p>
<p>Not to defend “funner.” but I think this is meant to be “more fun,” which is different from (and not different than) “funny.” And, yes, the weatherman erred in the other direction when saying “more mild” when he should have said “milder.”</p>
<p>Vyse: a) vernacular isn’t always correct usage and b) <em>which</em> dictionary and at what time and c) in light of b, as Marite notes, some dictionaries merely note use, not whether such usage is considered correct or not.</p>
<p>I use the MW Collegiate (10th) as my everyday desk dictionary myself. But a fourth definition can not be relied upon in many instances. </p>
<p>The language becomes clumsier for its loss. “It transpired that they had cooked the intelligence to justify their policy” is very different from “It happened that they had cooked the intelligence to justify their policy.”</p>
<p>Marite: la chandelier de ma tante est sur la table, tombee.</p>
<p>Otoh, I’ve been trying to bring “Huzzah!” back into currency, using it at football games these past many years.</p>
<p><i>“Doesn’t get worser than that.”</i></p>
<p>“Worser” is a word too.</p>
<p><a href=“http://m-w.com/dictionary/transpire[/url]”>http://m-w.com/dictionary/transpire</a></p>
<p>read the note at the bottom.</p>
<p>Our local paper once had an editorial on the issue of later school start times for high schools entitled “Early start time leads to sleep DEPRAVATION for students”. The ironic part was that the week before there had been a scandal at our local high school involving an assistant principal having an affair with a secretary, which was reported in our paper. I emailed the editor about the headline, saying that I thought it was the teachers who were “depraved”, not the students, and she wrote back saying that she and her coworkers had a good laugh from me catching her error :)</p>
<p>Ah well, if the function of a dictionary is merely to note a widespread usage even when it is incorrect, as in the two examples cited in the M-W Online Dictionary, , then I fear that we are leaving the door open to text-messaging pseudo-English. NE1 wants to argue the contrary?</p>
<p>Don’t even get me started on possessives used to represent plurals…</p>
<p>A differing view:
</p>
<p>As I said…which dictionary and when. Count me among the 42 percent.</p>