<p>I hate the usage of ‘irregardless’ . Or should that be “utilization”, Spoonyj? :)</p>
<p>To: optimizerdad
From: spoonyj
Re: “utilization”
cc: CC</p>
<p>At this particular time the committee has come to the decision that all future correspondence should henceforth employ the noun “utilization” in place of the previous “usage.” Much thanks and gratitude for your insights and observations.</p>
<p>
An interesting challenge. “Utilize” comes from “utility,” i.e., usefulness. To “utilize” something is to use it in a useful way. The ancient Romans had a small steam engine which they used as an entertaining novelty item. They failed to utilize it.</p>
<p>I find the particular use of “it’s” as the possessive of “it” to be exasperating. It’s not that difficult to use “its.”</p>
<p>I also am such a thorough pedant that I get annoyed when the period is not placed inside the quotation mark. </p>
<p>And finally, the possessive of “your” is “yours,” NOT “your’s.”</p>
<p>On the other hand, I couldn’t care less about split infinitives. (I also find it amusing that “I couldn’t care less” and “I could care less” have the same idiomatic meaning: “I don’t care.”)</p>
<p>I can’t stand the talk, and how can I put this where I don’t offend anyone, which I am sure it will, but its the “dumbing” down off speach we see on MTV, at the Video Awards last night; its that “urban” way of talking. And by urban, I don’t mean African American. I mean urban- said by all kinds of kids of all kinds of backgrounds.</p>
<p>And being a liberal, I should be more tolerant of the language, but it makes me bonkers.</p>
<p>I said it. I grew up in upstate New York saying dem and der all the time. Blech.</p>
<p>noone</p>
<p>CGM: I look at the trends and think I may turn into Henry Higgins before I’m through. (But when all is said and done, much has been said and little has been done.)</p>
<p>Btw, I was out of college before I got it’s/its down pat. My excuse was that before I did a Political Science major in four quarters I had been an engineering major and our motto was “It used to be I couldn’t spell ‘Ingineer’ but now I are one.”</p>
<p>“Disorientated” makes me want to claw my eyes out.</p>
<p>“I” used as an object –<em>Between you and I</em>
“reticent” for reluctant
apostrophes on all plurals and last names
school <em>busses</em>
quite for quiet
ice tea for iced tea (I’m about to give up on this one, but similar losses of “d” are just plain wrong).
kids on CC who are “definately aplying to ivy leage collages”</p>
<p>On the other hand, one of my favorite recent word inventions is “strategery,” used in a SNL skit to lampoon our misunderestimated president.</p>
<p>“ice tea for iced tea”
I blame that one on that darned rapper (notice “darned,” please).</p>
<p>
Oh yeah.</p>
<p>A CC-specific one:</p>
<p>Any reference to IVIES, IVY’S, or Ivys.
One Ivy League college = an Ivy.
Several Ivy League colleges = several Ivies.</p>
<p>Isn’t this common sense?</p>
<p>If this is Grammar Nazi Heaven, is this where we also come for confession and forgiveness? Although I am 100 percent sure of the difference between “their” and “there”, with almost 100 percent certainty, for some reason whenever I type them, I type them wrong. I need something in my PC that automatically reverses “their” to “there” and vice versa.</p>
<p>But, at least I know the difference between “a lot” and “alot”. A lot of educated people don’t.</p>
<p>Let’s cross the boarder.</p>
<p>;)</p>
<p>My favorite is “dinning halls.” The poor acoustics in many eating establishments often make the misspelling appropriate.</p>
<p>Using “that” instead of “who” when referring to a person. As in, “the student that applied to the college.” A person is a who, a thing is a that.</p>
<p>Okay, so as we sit and ruminate, in England a student is allowed to say the Fword up to five times a day:
BBC NEWS
<a href=“http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/northamptonshire/4194098.stm[/url]”>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/northamptonshire/4194098.stm</a></p>
<p>School gives pupils f-word limit </p>
<p>Pupils are being allowed to swear at one Northamptonshire secondary school - as long as they limit their use of bad language to five times a lesson. </p>
<p>A tally of how many times the f-word is used will be kept on the board. </p>
<p>Parents of children at the Weavers School in Wellingborough were told of the new policy in a letter, according to a report in the Daily Mail. …“The reality is that the f-word is part of these young adults’ everyday language,” he told the Daily Mail. </p>
<p>Assistant headmaster Richard White said the policy was aimed at two classes of 15 and 16-year-olds that were particularly unruly. …"</p>
<p>Theres more, I guess its a way of monitoring language…</p>
<p>It isn’t just the spelling of “definitely,” it’s its [sorry] meaninglessness. I’d be surprised to find a single sentence on CC where removal of the word would change anything.</p>
<p>I hate the comma splice with every ounce of my being. </p>
<p>A few other pet peeves:
errors of pronoun case (who/whom, “between you and I,” etc.)
mixing up restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses
neglecting to enclose parenthetical remarks within two commas
confusing i.e. with e.g.
neglecting to use the subjunctive mood when it would be appropriate (“I wish I was…”)
incorrect hyphenation (e.g. “the red stained shirt” instead of “the red-stained shirt”)</p>
<p>I could go on for hours. Instead, though, I’ll leave you with this: I once saw a sign that said, “Discount tables, chairs, sofas, stools, e.t.c.” I keeled over in horrified laughter.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think it would certainly change something. “Definitely” adds emphasis to a statement; to remove it would be to do away with the writer’s intended nuance of meaning. It may not add a wholly new concept, but a sentence that contains it has a different connotation than a sentence that doesn’t.</p>
<p>Yes, it connotes airheadedness.</p>
<p>[neglecting to enclose parenthetical remarks within two commas]
I see I did this in an earlier post. Oops.</p>