this post was submitted on 05 May 2024
81 points (85.8% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26985 readers
2403 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

It bugs me when people say "the thing is is that" (if you listen for it, you'll start hearing it... or maybe that's something that people only do in my area.) ("What the thing is is that..." is fine. But "the thing is is that..." bugs me.)

Also, "just because doesn't mean ." That sentence structure invites one to take "just because " as a noun phrase which my brain really doesn't want to do. Just doesn't seem right. But that sentence structure is very common.

And I'm not saying there's anything objectively wrong with either of these. Language is weird and complex and beautiful. It's just fascinating that some commonly-used linguistic constructions just hit some people wrong sometimes.

Edit: I thought of another one. "As best as I can." "The best I can" is fine, "as well as I can" is good, and "as best I can" is even fine. But "as best as" hurts.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 51 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (9 children)

I hate that punctuation is “supposed” to go inside quotation marks. If you doing anything more complex than a simple statement of a quote, you run into cases where it doesn’t make sense to me.

Did he say “I had pancakes for supper?” and Did he say “I had pancakes for supper”? mean different things to me.

Similarly: That jerk called me a “tomato!” and That jerk called me a “tomato”!

It feels to me that the first examples add emphasis to the quotes that did not exist when originally spoken, whereas the second examples isolate the quote, which is the whole point of putting it in quotation marks.

[–] TootSweet 10 points 6 months ago

Yes! That's a good one.

Once place I've heard this take on punctuation mentioned is in Eric Raymond's (version of) the Hacker Jargon File.

(I just realized when I included a link in the above sentence, I included the word "in" to make it clear I was not referring to the whole Hacker Jargon File, but rather a specific part in it.)

[–] mojo_raisin 7 points 6 months ago

Completely agree, I put puncutation outside the quotes, screw the rules, being sensical is more important.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 6 months ago

I’m driven insane by the use of “itch” as a verb in place of scratch. ‘He itched his leg.’ Bleh!

[–] llamapocalypse 28 points 6 months ago (1 children)

"Would of", "could of", and "should of" infuriate me for some reason.

[–] RGB3x3 21 points 6 months ago (5 children)

Because they're wrong. And not in a "these kids and their new-fangled language" way, but in a "this is literally improper English" way.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I really can't stand when someone says something happened, or they did something, "on accident".

No. You do something on purpose or by accident.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I vaguely remember hearing that you can know whether someone was born before or after a specific year, depending on whether they use by or on accident.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JoeKrogan 25 points 6 months ago (2 children)

"On accident"..... That doesn't even make sense. You do something "by accident".

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

When discussion leads to another question, it raises the question.

To beg the question is to invoke a presumptive, circular argument.

And yet, now it's to beg the question, even on the US Senate floor by boomers who should know better.

[–] Theharpyeagle 19 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

I hate the confusion that "do you mind" questions cause.

"Do you mind if I turn off the light?"

What is meant in response: "No (I don't mind)"

What's said instead: "Yes"

I feel like two people never really know how the other will interpret it, so you almost always have to say something like "yes, go ahead" or "no, I don't mind" (or "no, go ahead"). If they do respond just "yes" or "no", I feel like I have to ask for clarification.

Also can we get the meaning of "semi-" and "bi-" figured out? I generally love the oddities of evolving language so long as we can all still be understood, but these two always require clarification.

Bi-annual: Every two years.
Semi-annual: Twice a year

Make it a law!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 months ago (4 children)

my peeve is the chopped infinitive, like “it needs fixed” instead of “it needs to be fixed”

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago (3 children)

One thing I try to avoid when I'm writing is when two words repeat. Kind of like your example "the thing is is that." If I catch myself writing it, I try to rearrange the sentence.

Although a pretty extreme example tickles me: "The cookie he had had had had no effect on his appetite."

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

James, while John had had "had", had had "had had". "Had had" had had a better effect on the teacher.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago

I hate this, thank you.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mrunicornman 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Using "basis" to mean "based on".

"Basis our discussion, please go ahead and..." "We decided on a price point basis our market research."

It makes me uncomfortable.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago

I haven't encountered that and it's upsetting and dumb.

[–] daddyjones 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I hate the recent trend of using "onboarding". It sounds clunky to me and as if you're trying to sound all cool and up to date.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (6 children)

Misusing words like "setup" vs "set up", or "login" vs "log in". "Anytime" vs "any time" also steams my clams.

[–] RGB3x3 10 points 6 months ago (2 children)

So I use both, depending on context. "Setup" is a noun, "set up" is a verb. "Login" is a noun, "log in" is a verb.

I've been sitting here trying to figure out different proper contexts for "anytime" vs "any time," but honestly, I can decide one way or the other.

[–] moistclump 6 points 6 months ago

“Thanks” “anytime!”

“I wish you had done that any time other than right now.”

Were the first two that came to mind.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

I saw "I literally could careless" and almost had a stroke.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (7 children)

What really gets me agitated is when people don't use the helper verb "to be." Examples include, "The tea needs strained," or "The car needs washed." No, you miserable cunts. The tea needs TO BE strained. The car needs TO BE washed. Nothing presently needs the past tense of an action. I know there's parts of the US where this sentence construction is common but those entire regions can honestly fuck off. People say it's a dialect or something. I don't buy it. Not knowing basic rules of your native language isn't a dialect. It's just you being dumb. I hate it so much!

You know what else I hate? "It is what it is." Of course it is, you dense motherfucker! If it wasn't what it was, it would be something else, which would then be what it is! It's the most nonsensical phrase I've ever heard and it pretty much exists so you have something to say when you have nothing even remotely worth hearing to say.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

"it is what it is" makes sense to me. Yes, it's tautological. But it's just emphasizing the point that whatever it is cannot be changed by the people ~~discussion~~ discussing it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] BugleFingers 9 points 6 months ago (3 children)

"Next weekend" "Next Friday" etc. Wherein they use "Next" to mean "the one after" rather than "the soonest interval in which it will reoccur"

If it is Wednesday and you say "Next Friday" I will immediately think of two days from now, not 9 days. I also especially dislike it because if feels like on a whim that it'll change. for some "next weekend" will be in 5 days if it's Monday, or 10 days if it's Wednesday! What the heck people??

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 months ago (3 children)

On a Wednesday I would use "This Friday" or just "Friday" to describe 2 days away. Using "next" in the context you're describing seems weird to me.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This might be due to the fact that I'm not a native speaker and I encountered this phrase at a later date, but people saying "it's all but xyz" to mean "it's xyz" really gets on my nerves. I get it, "it's all but complete" means that virtually all the conditions are met for it to be complete, but I find it so annoying for some reason.

"The task is all but impossible" registers as 'it's not impossible, it's everything else: possible', so the fact that it means the opposite of that makes my brain twitch.

[–] wjrii 6 points 6 months ago

English intensifiers tend not to follow Boolean logic flows very well (think of double negatives). Instead, try to think of it as a little bit of extra data for your or the speaker's benefit. "It's all but impossible" does mean it's possible, as you say, but there is more there. It means, "while this is possible, it's so difficult or unlikely that we cannot count on normal levels of luck or effort to help us; you should reset your expectations accordingly."

Your other example is similar. "It's all but complete" tells you that the project or event is almost but notyet complete, but more than that. It means "This is very nearly complete. It is so close to complete, in fact, that the remaining time will be trivial. I suspect or know that you are eager for it to be complete, so unless doing so is all but impossible (😁), please try to be patient just a little bit longer."

"All but" is a way to linguistically make a fine gradation in levels of "almost".

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)

"Aren't I", as in "I'm still going with you, aren't I?", which, when uncontracted, becomes "are I not?" It should be "ain't I" since "ain't" is a proper contraction for "amn't", but there's been an irrational suppression of "ain't".

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

which, when uncontracted, becomes “are I not?”

Nope ‘are not I?’

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The thing is is that it's just a phrase to hold space while you collect your thoughts before you speak. You know you have something worth saying, but may not have organized it into a cohesive sentence/words just yet

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Myself, where a reflexive pronoun wouldn't normally be used, typically near a conjunction where it is less obvious whether an objective or subjective pronoun is appropriate. eg "Jane and myself ate Bob's donuts." or "Bob brought donuts for Jane and myself."

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Etterra 7 points 6 months ago (2 children)

"Going forward" bothers me so much and I have no idea why. It wasn't used when I was younger, but that's true for lots of things.

Also "cringe" is pretty annoying.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I don't care so much when I'm just listening to people talk, but there's something about seeing people use needs washed constructs in otherwise normally composed and edited messages that drives me absolutely mad, for some reason. Stuff like "I need paid more to afford to live there." I first started seeing it on reddit a few years ago, but it seems as though I'm seeing it more and more now, all over the place. It's not something that is used anywhere I've lived, and it's just jarring to see sentences constantly missing a couple of words. I suppose I expect more variance in spoken language, especially in less formal contexts, but seeing it written is something else.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Turning words like"competence" and "resilience" into "competency" and "resiliency" because more syllables is moar smartr

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] WindyRebel 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (7 children)

I’m not certain if this is what you were getting at, but these are mine:

An historical - It doesn’t follow the general way of using a or an with consonants and vowels. Nor does it change the meaning if I said a historical (event) instead an historical (event).

Fewer and less. I understand that there is a rule, but the rule is fucking dumb. If I say there are less people or if I say there are fewer people - the end result is the same that there isn’t as much as there was before.

Language is fluid. As long as we understand the meaning of what is being said then who cares?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You may be fewer irritated by this with age

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] databender 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I hate it when people call the product of a company the name of the company; like "let's go get some Taco Bell" instead of "let's go get some tacos from Taco Bell" or "Let's go eat at Taco Bell".

[–] Theharpyeagle 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That's a curious one, can you explain why it bothers you? Or is it just one of those things?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rhynoplaz 6 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I really hate R's in the middle of familiar.

It's not feR-mill-yer.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (5 children)

I hate the word "cleanse" because it means the same thing a "clean" but uses two extra letters. Fuck the word "cleanse."

I've recently started hearing people say "It needs cleaned." Meaning it needs cleaning or it needs to be cleaned, and it just shifts to the wrong gear.

I also hate the word "leverage" in the bullshit business lingo sense of the word. Just makes me think "Your business leverages solutions, and uses people." Tell me, when did your brain die?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] tanisnikana 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I hate when people use the transitive “going to be” to describe “is.”

“Hey, what’s your phone number?” “It’s going to be 911-551-0911.”

Her phone number is 911-551-0911 and has been such for a while now. Why does she feel the need to use a transitive verb structure to describe that it will change to that in the future?

I see people using this “it’s going to be” structure for ordering food (they are ordering food now, saying “spaghetti, please” is much less weird than saying “it’s going to be spaghetti”), as part of my job when someone is reporting current or past statistics, and events that aren’t coming up or aren’t scheduled, and are in the past.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AnUnusualRelic 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

People who say "nucular" strike me as being completely brain damaged.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] blazeknave 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I still don't end sentences with a preposition. Even aloud.

[–] Hildegarde 8 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I still don't know what a preposition even is. What are they even for?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Dasus 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Well I don't think there's any in English I mind, but I cringe about a ton of things in my native language.

However you did make me think of one expression.

You'll never hear "it did didn't it?" the same way again.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

I work in IT and the one that kills me is when someone says or writes "On premise" when they mean "On premises". I have worked for cloud companies and even the official literature is wrong. It has gotten to the point where so many people get it wrong that the official meaning is going to be changed because people are dumb and we can't have nice things.

Words have meaning, stop fucking them up!

load more comments
view more: next ›