101 Things that get on our tits but don't actually matter in the slightest.
-
Saying like and totally doesn't get on my tits anywhere near as much as typing it. It's a vocab thing whilst speaking, like, why would you type that shit out?
-
My kids and their friends are currently under a shock and awe campaign from me over the use of tag. It's called tig you little fucking spastics.
-
I am guilty of a few of Nick's ones.
The dishwasher stuff I am right with though.
It is coupled with my irrational hatred for bean juice. Putting something in the dishwasher becomes like that scene in Flash Gordon with Timothy Dalton and the tree stump. -
Similar:Kow wrote:"the fact is" followed by completely subjective nonsense.
- Literally, a metaphor.
- Anything presaged with "Now, I'm not racist/sexist/etc, but..." -
I don't mind literally if it's used for exaggerating something, overuse makes it harder to do though and people love to fingerwag literally every usage of the word now.
-
Liveinadive wrote:I am guilty of a few of Nick's ones.
We can work these things out over our shared disdain for poor dishwasher etiquette. -
-
Tempy wrote:I don't mind literally if it's used for exaggerating something, overuse makes it harder to do though and people love to fingerwag literally every usage of the word now.
-
n0face wrote:My kids and their friends are currently under a shock and awe campaign from me over the use of tag. It's called tig you little fucking spastics.
It's called 'it'
Also, if literally upsets you, take a leaf from Archer's book and start using 'figuratively' instead. Also doesn't literally, literally translate to 'as it is written' (literature similar root), so surely if you could say it if someone somewhere has written it"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
-
You're going to give me an American dictionary. I am disappoint
edit: Also didn't Ihear that the definition of literally was changed a few years ago to allow it to be used as a form of exageration, so literally means blah, blah, blah and not literallly"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
Well more of them speak it. Plus Kermode is always doing it so it must be right.
-
This one is driving me mad lately.djchump wrote:"Addicting" ... gnnnnnnn "Irregardless" ... GARGARHGARGHARGHARGHARH!Live= sgt pantyfire PSN= pantyfire -
Aye, literally literally doesn't mean literally anymore because literally so many people have used it in literally the wrong way that it's literally changed the meaning of literally.cockbeard wrote:You're going to give me an American dictionary. I am disappoint edit: Also didn't Ihear that the definition of literally was changed a few years ago to allow it to be used as a form of exageration, so literally means blah, blah, blah and not literallly -
Except using a word 'wrongly' for effect is one of the beautiful things about language, which is why I struggle to be annoyed by it, except when it's overused, like 'like' and totally.
You'd need to add words like awesome to the same list because people use it so frivolously that it's due a dictionary definition update to change its meaning to 'quite good' -
English has no regulatory or standardising body (unlike many other languages), so whatever a lot of people start saying becomes right really. Unfortunately.
-
Kow wrote:English has no regulatory or standardising body (unlike many other languages), so whatever a lot of people start saying becomes right really. Unfortunately.
Kind of unfortunately but the minute it doesn't get used in new ways it starts going the way of Greek and Latin. I suppose the OED could be seen as the standard"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
In some ways that's good, I'm doing beginners French at uni as a filler course and it is a bastard language because they're so unwilling to update to match current usages
-
Language really makes me smile. In almost every country email is normally email but in a local accent. I think even in Spain (little help please Kow), it's not e-correos is it? However Finland, where they were probably using it wider and earlier than most countries sahko-posti
My favourite though was during the the Yugoslavian war, and the Bosnians (non Muslim) started to refuse to use Serbian words, so the word for belt became a compound noun which translated as ' around the waist trouser holder' and the word 'helikopteri' which they called an 'air whisk'"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
cockbeard wrote:
Kind of unfortunately but the minute it doesn't get used in new ways it starts going the way of Greek and Latin. I suppose the OED could be seen as the standardKow wrote:English has no regulatory or standardising body (unlike many other languages), so whatever a lot of people start saying becomes right really. Unfortunately.
The OED is more a collection of language, it has no authority to decide if something is acceptable or not. As an example, the expression 'If I were you' in the past was the only acceptable form - now 'If I was you' is generally accepted (and taught). There's no record of when this happened or if it really is acceptable, because there's nobody to make any ruling on it. Hence many older people will just say it's wrong. But it isn't.
In Spanish the word for license - 'carné' was changed from 'carnet' a few years ago, because people just weren't pronouncing the final t anyway. The change was officially logged by the Royal Academy of Spanish and now that's the word. You won't hear the previous version any more and there's no argument about which is right or wrong. -
cockbeard wrote:Language really makes me smile. In almost every country email is normally email but in a local accent. I think even in Spain (little help please Kow), it's not e-correos is it?
Officially it's correo electronico but most people say email. The fact that Spanish is regulated means that it's quite defensive of words and often tries to obstruct foreign 'anglisizations' from entering the language. The fact that English doesn't, indeed can't, do this is possibly one of the reasons why it has managed to spread as an international language. It's flexible. -
NMD wrote:- should of
Oh god yes. In fact this should be numbers 1 through 101 and we can close this thread now.
-
Yossarian wrote:
Oh god yes. In fact this should be numbers 1 through 101 and we can close this thread now.- should of
Thirded. Only real cunts say (or write, really) this. -
Wow, I didn't know that Spanish was regulated like that, seems really weird that does. The only languages I've been exposed to were quite open to slang, interpretation and as said, a state of flux when in the former Yugoslavia"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B
-
Slang exists here just fine, as do mistakes etc. The only difference is that they are understood as mistakes - there's no debate about it.
-
French is somewhat similar from what I've heard. In the past 10 years the Academy has maybe put the ok on maybe 100 words to have their spelling amended based on pronunciation, or new words added etc.
Which is nonsense cos the french are so incredibly blase about the relationship between spelling and pronunciation anyway - our teacher warns us that plenty of people just drop consonants because "they can't be bothered to pronounce them" as if it takes such an incredible fortitude of will to say quatre with the R.
Much like English, most of the problem can be traced back to grasps at legitimacy via Latin. It fucked our grammar system and it fucked their spelling. -
Us English can't slag off the French for poor pronunciation, ours is about the most lackadaisical on the planet.
-
Oi wozzn't dooin nuffink
-
If we're on the subject of language and Americanisms then British people using 'douche' or 'douchebag' really annoys me.
We have some of the finest swearwords known to man at our disposal in this country and some of the finest proponents of swearing in history have been British (often Scottish) yet we're importing useless inoffensive nothing words like 'douchebag'. I don't usually get jingoistic about things, I really couldn't care less about it in most situations but that particular one irritates me.
EDIT: In real life I mean, seeing it written online doesn't bother me much. -
n0face wrote:Isn't on point a military term, possibly American, for the person at the front.
Yep, the poor bugger at the front who gets killed first.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions2,713
- Games1,877
- Off topic836