Flesh it out versus flush it out- I know some pretty smart people who are always discussing the need to flush out that idea for the proposal.
Nip it in the butt- I hear this frequently and it cracks me up. I actually think I like it better than the real saying but it is still wrong.
And I worked with a lovely woman who always said “supposably”. I never had the heart to correct her.
Seems logical to me: Nip it in the butt, then flush…
@GMTplus7 - good one- thanks for the laugh!! 
Olive the other reindeer, and for Richard Stands…
who’s and whose
I notice the grammatical errors that have been discussed here, but I’d hesitate to point fingers when there’s an active thread with such an error. Perhaps it’s because of a different type of regional difference – I was raised in the midwest where being kind and avoiding the appearance of arrogance were stressed. I recently typed the wrong homophone, maybe because I was tired and in a hurry, so I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt.
If I were so bothered that I wanted to make a point about grammar, I’d do it at a later time to avoid embarrassing the poster. To the moderator who changed the title of the thread in question, thank you. And to the OP of that thread, I always enjoy your thoughtful posts and appreciate your perspective. I look forward to continuing to hear your voice, and I’ll overlook your lapses if you’ll overlook mine. So they’re/there/their!
Shoo-in vs. shoe-in is also one that irks me! I’m pretty sure it’s the former (as in one would be shooed through the door) but I’ve only ever seen it as the latter.
I admit my apostrophe use could be better, though. I don’t call Mondays * Monday’s * or anything, but I’m cognizant of the fact that apostrophes in dates go where the years are left off (eg: the '90s instead of the 90’s) and still insist on doing it incorrectly! I also like to add apostrophes to initialisms like the SAT’s and AP’s. Pleasantly surprised that no one’s called me out on these in my year and a half of posting here, haha.
Guess we all have our so-called grammar quirks!
Whether or not to use apostrophes in initialisms is a matter of style. Either is correct; different style manuals have different rules.
I find it funny that a mix-up I see often in posts here is accept/except.
This thread is great. When I read each post, I’d say “yes, that too!” It got me wondering: Are other languages equally prone to error? It seems we English speakers are forever finding new ways to get it wrong. I speak Spanish also, and maybe it’s because I don’t speak it well enough to spot the errors, but I just don’t see the same trends. For those of you who speak other languages, what are you seeing?
I also speak Spanish. And am FB friends with many Spanish speakers. The teens especially are so hard to understand. Some words in Spanish change meaning with or without the accent mark. They don’t seem to know that.
Another thing that I find pretty funny is when people say “I could care less.” It means the complete opposite of what the person intended to say almost 100% of the time.
And this is a few pages back, but @teriwtt there are a lot of things that you just wouldn’t necessarily know without formal education, or that at least most people wouldn’t connect the dots on. Elliptical clauses, subjective vs. objective case pronouns (especially when you have multiple clauses and phrases), and a few other more annoying concepts aren’t as obvious as you may think.
@hayden There are more errors in Spanish speakers than you’d imagine. I don’t speak it fluently at all, but my Argentinian Spanish teacher (educated at the University of Buenos Aires) always says “pedir por.” I think a lot of the time as non-native speakers we’re less prone to noticing the mistakes.
I had long assumed that he origin of “shoo-in” was livestock herding, referring to shooing animals into an enclosure instead of driving them in, most likely with the assistance of a dog.
I just looked it up: apparently the first usage was in 1937, and it refers to a horse that is certain to win a race, most likely because the race is fixed.
Let’s not forget “round John Virgin mother and child…”
Isn’t that what this whole thread is doing? Well, that, and posting funny song lyric mistakes?
This thread has made me think of another common expression that I’ve seen written in different ways in recent years.
I grew up hearing and reading the expression “set foot in/on,” as in “I wouldn’t set foot in that filthy restroom if you paid me,” or “No sooner had she set foot on campus than she demanded we leave.” On CC, one frequently sees “step foot” instead, and recently I saw it in a periodical for the first time.
Any thoughts?
ETA: Hail, Mary Delores Whitney!
Oh, yeah, Consolation, that is another one that bugs me, and where the language seems to be devolving - a misusage becomes so rampant that it eventually becomes accepted.
Another one that is devolving - “by accident” (the correct usage) being replaced by “on accident”.
And (I think this may have already been mentioned here) “comprised” being misused such that “composed of” is becoming replaced by “comprised of” ('cuz it sounds so much more intelligent, don’cha know?)
Well, the OED has citations for “step foot on/ into” going back to 1540. Earliest citation is from John Palsgrave, Acolastus: “Steppe not one foot forth of this place.” Other notable citations include Samuel GW Benjamin, from Troy (1880): “Calchas announced that the first man who stepped foot on the enemy’s soil was doomed at once to die.” Make of that what you will. Probably won’t stop some folks from looking down their noses at others for using the phrase.
I’m reminded of when my kids were teens and I spent so much time correcting their saying “vers” instead of “versus” for “vs”. They could write it correctly, just said it wrong.
Nottelling - Still, in current times it has NOT been considered standard usage, even though it has been increasing in frequency in the US since the 1980s