What's your biggest grammatical pet peeve?

[LiquidMidnight]

-Double negatives
-Adding an apostrophe for the posessive form of "it"
-Placing the comma outside of the quotation marks of a phrase when the subject is at the end of the sentence (i.e., "The cat's downstairs", said Martha, instead of the correct way: "The cat's downwstairs," said Martha)

 

[cdef]

"Seen" used as a preterite instead of "saw".

 

[AlembicPlayer]

no mention of..
gangstabonics ?


Fo' shizzle !

 

[NJL]

So basically my 4th grade class.

bc

LOL

i miss your teaching blog

btw, get ready for iphone os3 announcements today

 

[MakiSupaStar]

"Seen" used as a preterite instead of "saw".

I seen what you did there.

 

[Valerus]

"could of" instead of "could have"

but the worst thing to me is the improper use of you're / your

"your gay"

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

but the worst thing to me is the improper use of you're / your

"your gay"

I was listening to the radio today and somrbody was talking about the concept of "Gaia" (Lovelock etc) - but he was pronouncing it "gayer" - I thought he was trying to be insulting to the interviewer....


As in : you're gayer than a [insert camp thing]....

 

[COOL AND DEADLY]

I don't like when people use "well" instead of "good" because they are so terrified of using "good" as an adverb, that they use "well" as an adverb and as an adjective. By the way, it's perfectly okay to say "I am good" as well as "I am well."

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

As applied to human beings :

Well = healthy and fit
Good = angelic, pure in heart etc!!

 

[Vorago]

My biggest grammatical pet peeve is

-people *****ing about what are in fact completely normal developments and evolutions in natural spoken languages (I'm not talking about improper spelling, internet lingo, although these things are often reflections of spoken language).

-the same people linking the utterance of these 'abnormalities' to the utterer's intelligence (or the imagined lack thereof).

 

[MakiSupaStar]

My biggest grammatical pet peeve is

-people *****ing about what are in fact completely normal developments and evolutions in natural spoken languages (I'm not talking about improper spelling, internet lingo, although these things are often reflections of spoken language).

-the same people linking the utterance of these 'abnormalities' to the utterer's intelligence (or the imagined lack thereof).

I don't even know what you're saying.

 

[Vorago]

Ask Fassa, she's a linguist, too

 

[blipndub]

"pacific" instead of specific

 

[wabbit]

"pacific" instead of specific

Egads!!! People don't actually say that do they? I can see it if one was under four years of age but after that, chinese water torture or needles under the fingernails to correct that nonsense.

 

[blipndub]

I've known two people in my work who have said this. One of whom I work with now!

+10 for the word, Egads instead of OMFG or ROTFL or ***.

 

[blipndub]

Graft instead of Graph. That's a good one.

 

[lousybassplayer]

Athleticism. Don't know if that applies here or not, and I can't even remember if I mentioned it before, but if so it is worth repeating. I hate that "word".

 

[bass player 48]

Granite.

I actually hear people start sentences this way. "Well, granite, I did do poorly in school, but..."

Then there's the only slightly less stupid version. Grant it. "Well, grant it, you do know more about grammar than I do..."

A good friend once spent weeks arguing with his college roommate over whether it should be "granted" or "grant it" and the eventually agreed to disagree.

There’s a local radio guy that says “grant it” on the radio, now granted – he is the buffoon of the program and nobody thinks of him as intelligent, but it still drives me nuts to hear “grant it” on the radio.

 

[DigMe]

That concludes our monthly TB grammar whining thread.

Now back to your 4 string vs. 6 string debates.

bc

 

[Craig_S]

One should never take concrete for granite.