# Words, Phrases, and Misspellings We Hate



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 12, 2013)

Savage Wombat wagered in the gish thread that if I started a thread about my grammatical pet peeves, I'd get plenty of sympathy hate. So I am.

My first one is a recent development: character option 'bloat.' I'm sorry, but bloat is a female problem. Options are icing on the game cake!

My second one is the notorious 'rouge.' Every time I see it in the context of a D&D discussion, I wonder how gamers can see 'rogue' printed a zillion times in their game books and still misspell it. But I try not to get all grammar nazi about it, because it's also a testament to how asinine the English language is.

'Rogue' is an exception to a completely unnecessary exception. Normally G makes its own sound; except when it's followed by an E, in which case it makes the J sound. (Talk about violation of niche protection! And some of us complain when one character class or other inches into the precious personal space of another. G and its minion E outright beat J up, and take its place whenever they please!) But wait! When U gets between G and E, G has to stick to its own sound. So we end up with a five letter word with one vowel too many, because English can't be bothered to keep its grammar any saner than the 3.0 Epic Level Handbook.

Actually, it's no wonder that so many gamers misspell rouge. Er, rogue. 

My third one isn't D&D specific, but it comes up plenty in D&D: redundant letters, mid-word apostrophes, and ambiguous vowels. Examples include Drizzt Do'Urden, Baatezu, and Tanar'ri. Basically, too many writers of fantasy fiction think that turning English's schizophrenic nature up to 11 makes their fiction more exotic-sounding and imaginative; but I'm tired of it. It doesn't sound cool anymore, it just takes me out of the fiction when a part of my brain gets sidetracked trying to decide how best to mentally pronounce things.

When I first got my Planescape boxed CS, I thought the weird fiendish nomenclature was neat and gave the D&D multiverse a unique air. But after years of being inundated with equally bizarre names, and learning why 2e didn't leave well enough alone with 'demons' and 'devils,' I've switched to the latter.

My fourth and fifth aren't game-related at all, but are nevertheless worthy of discussion:

'I could care less.' No, I don't think that doesn't mean what you think it means; I _know_ it doesn't mean what you think it means. Who's with me?

'A near miss.' Ever since I was introduced the hilarity that is George Carlin, it's bugged me every time I hear this. Although Umbran suggested the possible 'miss that nearly hit' origin of the phrase, which I guess I can dig.

What are yours?


----------



## Umbran (Sep 12, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> My first one is a recent development: character option 'bloat.' I'm sorry, but bloat is a female problem.




No, it isn't a "female problem".  In Veterinary medicine, "bloat" is the common term for _gastric dilatation-volvulus_, in which the dog's stomach becomes twisted, and filled with gas or fluid, likely leading to rupture and death within hours. Something like 25% to 40% of dogs die from bloat.

Oh, and you don't get to call bloat a female problem until you can demonstrate that the term "fatbeard" is totally unwarranted.  Men get bloated too!



> 'I could care less.' No, I don't think that doesn't mean what you think it means; I _know_ it doesn't mean what you think it means. Who's with me?




Yah, this one is horrible.



> What are yours?




The now all too common "literally" used as a stressor.  Ugh.


----------



## Savage Wombat (Sep 12, 2013)

One that I remember being bothered by was "canon" being misspelled as "cannon" - not just because it's a misspelling, but because some people I read thought it actually referred to the siege weapon.  Don't use phrases you don't understand, people.

My mother always hated "hopefully" to mean "I hope that" - since hopefully should be an adverb.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 12, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> Savage Wombat wagered in the gish thread that if I started a thread about my grammatical pet peeves, I'd get plenty of sympathy hate. So I am.
> 
> My first one is a recent development: character option 'bloat.' I'm sorry, but bloat is a female problem. Options are icing on the game cake!




Is your complaint here grammatical or do you just disagree with the attitude that piling on too many options can be a bad thing? Either way, I'm not sure I see the issue.

Certainly, when I level-up my 4e character and see a ludicrously-long list of feats pop up in the character builder (and that's just the ones my PC meets the requirements for!), that's definitely a bloated list of options.



> My second one is the notorious 'rouge.' Every time I see it in the context of a D&D discussion, I wonder how gamers can see 'rogue' printed a zillion times in their game books and still misspell it. But I try not to get all grammar nazi about it, because it's also a testament to how asinine the English language is.
> 
> 'Rogue' is an exception to a completely unnecessary exception. Normally G makes its own sound; except when it's followed by an E, in which case it makes the J sound. (Talk about violation of niche protection! And some of us complain when one character class or other inches into the precious personal space of another. G and its minion E outright beat J up, and take its place whenever they please!) But wait! When U gets between G and E, G has to stick to its own sound. So we end up with a five letter word with one vowel too many, because English can't be bothered to keep its grammar any saner than the 3.0 Epic Level Handbook.
> 
> Actually, it's no wonder that so many gamers misspell rouge. Er, rogue.




Yeah, it's a tricky one, but that's English for you. Between borrowed words and inconsistently-applied 'rules', the language is mostly composed of exceptions. There's an old quote I rather like:

“The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.” 
― James Nicoll​


> My third one isn't D&D specific, but it comes up plenty in D&D: redundant letters, mid-word apostrophes, and ambiguous vowels. Examples include Drizzt Do'Urden, Baatezu, and Tanar'ri. Basically, too many writers of fantasy fiction think that turning English's schizophrenic nature up to 11 makes their fiction more exotic-sounding and imaginative; but I'm tired of it. It doesn't sound cool anymore, it just takes me out of the fiction when a part of my brain gets sidetracked trying to decide how best to mentally pronounce things.
> 
> When I first got my Planescape boxed CS, I thought the weird fiendish nomenclature was neat and gave the D&D multiverse a unique air. But after years of being inundated with equally bizarre names, and learning why 2e didn't leave well enough alone with 'demons' and 'devils,' I've switched to the latter.




I do rather like some of them - Baatezu and Tanar'ri work for me. What I find awkward is reading such words and mentally applying what I think is the obvious pronounciation for them, only to find out - maybe years later - that the 'official' pronounciation is entirely different.



> My fourth and fifth aren't game-related at all, but are nevertheless worthy of discussion:
> 
> 'I could care less.' No, I don't think that doesn't mean what you think it means; I _know_ it doesn't mean what you think it means. Who's with me?




Yeah, it's a bit nonsensical, but I think people just muddled it because they got tripped up in the double negative of the original "I couldn't care less".



> 'A near miss.' Ever since I was introduced the hilarity that is George Carlin, it's bugged me every time I hear this. Although Umbran suggested the possible 'miss that nearly hit' origin of the phrase, which I guess I can dig.




I think you and George are both proceeding from a false assumption here - that "near" is being used as shorthand for "nearly". A near miss is a miss that passed nearby.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 12, 2013)

Savage Wombat said:


> Don't use phrases you don't understand, people.




If you hear it spoken, how are you supposed to know you don't understand it?


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Sep 12, 2013)

"build"

It's a player character, not a barn!


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 13, 2013)

Umbran said:


> The now all too common "literally" used as a stressor.  Ugh.



This doesn't bother me, but it really should. It's literally a misuse of the word. 

Maybe it's because I think Chris Traegar is hilarious on Parks & Rec.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 13, 2013)

Savage Wombat said:


> My mother always hated "hopefully" to mean "I hope that" - since hopefully should be an adverb.



Ugh, my father used to ask me "I don't know, _can_ you?" when I asked him "Can I have...?" He eventually gave up, though.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 13, 2013)

MarkB said:


> Is your complaint here grammatical or do you just disagree with the attitude that piling on too many options can be a bad thing? Either way, I'm not sure I see the issue.



Okay, I fudged my first complaint. It's not really grammar-related, and it comes with a BIG 'all options being roughly equal' qualifier.


----------



## Cadence (Sep 13, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> a zillion times in their game books and still misspell it. But I try not to get all grammar nazi about it, because it's also a testament to how asinine the English language is.




Zillion isn't a number, your words aren't committing genocide, and stop being a potty mouth.

Bloat and near miss seem ok to me, but I agree on the rest.

In general, I could probably care less, but I'm not sure how.

My biggest pet peeve is when someone gets self righteous about a definition or proper usage... but the one they're criticizing has been a standard definition in the OED for 50+ years. 

I'm a big fan of they/their for third person singular of unknown gender.


----------



## Henry (Sep 13, 2013)

Another that just popped up in my mind -- "could of" instead of "could've" or "could have." Common speech and internet communications are full of malapropisms and mondegreens like this, though.


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Sep 13, 2013)

Cadence said:


> My biggest pet peeve is when someone gets self righteous about a definition or proper usage... but the one they're criticizing has been a standard definition in the OED for 50+ years.




The OED is an _inclusive_ dictionary. Its entire purpose is to track the use of language without judgement.

People who are sticklers for older, more precise definitions are attempting to treat English _exclusively_. Since we don't have any authoritative standards body for the English language, it's left entirely up to self-righteous word snobs to protect classic definitions, lest we lose their precision.


----------



## Zustiur (Sep 13, 2013)

> 'I could care less.' No, I don't think that doesn't mean what you think it means; I _know_ it doesn't mean what you think it means. Who's with me?




Dear god. This one makes me seethe with anger every time I see it. 

Dropping ly from the end of words is another one that annoys me.


----------



## Baron Greystone (Sep 13, 2013)

It's. As a possessive.

My blood pressure is rising just thinking about it.


----------



## Stormonu (Sep 13, 2013)

put me down for build, role and charop.  And gish.

Grammar and spelling rarely bother me, I live with a wife who has a learning disability and suffers greatly at the hands of the English language.

Personally, and beyond mere RPGs, I have a hate for any word with a french origin.  It's never spelt how spoken.  Hor d'ouevre (really?  really, really - how do you make that say ordurvs?), viola (wa-la, really?) , even melee (may-lay, c'mon!), as just a sample.


----------



## Orius (Sep 13, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> 'I could care less.' No, I don't think that doesn't mean what you think it means; I _know_ it doesn't mean what you think it means. Who's with me?




Actually, I could care less.  



Olgar Shiverstone said:


> "build"
> 
> It's a player character, not a barn!




That and I tend to associate it with charoping.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Sep 13, 2013)

Hey...if someone is good at charop, can we call that person a charopodist?


----------



## DonAdam (Sep 13, 2013)

New Grandma Rule: Grandma was an English teacher.


----------



## Dioltach (Sep 13, 2013)

People who use "inconceivable" incorrectly.
I'll second "could care less", "rouge" and "literally". And gratuitous vowels, consonants and apostrophes in names. And I'll add any work of fantasy that goes overboard with the letters and letter combinations A, Y, TH and AE.


----------



## Cadence (Sep 13, 2013)

Jeff Carlsen said:


> People who are sticklers for older, more precise definitions are attempting to treat English _exclusively. Since we don't have any authoritative standards body for the English language, it's left entirely up to self-righteous word snobs to protect classic definitions, lest we lose their precision._



Thinking about it, there are definitely a few cases where I applaud their work.

I think they're losing the battle for nonplussed.   It seems to happen so rarely that I'm always nonplussed when I see it used correctly... it  stops me in my tracks and I don't know if I should keep reading and think better of the author, go back and reread it again to make sure I actually saw it used right, or double check the dictionary to make sure that the author and I do have the definition right.

Accept is another one.  I'll take the way a lot of people use it to mean "believe" or "trust", but I have some reservations.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 13, 2013)

Cadence said:


> Accept is another one.  I'll take the way a lot of people use it to mean "believe" or "trust", but I have some reservations.




One that I've seen a few times recently is people using "accept" when they mean "except". I do wonder if, in at least some cases, it's the result of speech-to-text software taking a best guess.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 13, 2013)

MarkB said:


> One that I've seen a few times recently is people using "accept" when they mean "except". I do wonder if, in at least some cases, it's the result of speech-to-text software taking a best guess.



Oh good one! How about 'effect' for 'affect' and vice versa?

Those two I actually have to think about every time I type one of them.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 13, 2013)

DonAdam said:


> New Grandma Rule: Grandma was an English teacher.





Henry said:


> Another that just popped up in my mind -- "could of" instead of "could've" or "could have." Common speech and internet communications are full of malapropisms and mondegreens like this, though.



My mother, who teaches high school English, has kids who write 'gonna' in essays and such, actually thinking it's a legit word.

And it probably will be in a hundred years or so. And then people like me will be wondering 'Why is it spelled with an O? That's a _U_ sound!,' not realizing the origin of the word.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 13, 2013)

Zustiur said:


> Dropping ly from the end of words is another one that annoys me.



Where I come from, this happens fairly often is speech. "What's wrong, I speak proper."


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 13, 2013)

Baron Greystone said:


> It's. As a possessive.



Oh jeez, yeah!

Do people just not know the trick? (Replace the word with 'it is.' If the sentence still makes sense, use 'it's'; if not, use 'its.') Or do people just not care?


----------



## jasper (Sep 13, 2013)

I think I going to lose my  mind the next I see loose to mean lose. Or should I loosen up already.


----------



## TwoSix (Sep 13, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> This doesn't bother me, but it really should. It's literally a misuse of the word.




Certainly not the only word that's a contronym, just one everyone is more aware of because the definition has shifted recently.  



Tequila Sunrise said:


> Maybe it's because I think Chris Traegar is hilarious on Parks & Rec.



Rob Lowe plays _literally_ the best character on that show.


----------



## Cadence (Sep 13, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> Those two I actually have to think about every time I type one of them.




I completely get that.  Whenever I'm typing, the first use of a (near) homophone seems to always determine the way the rest of them are spelled throughout the document.  So the first their/they're/there is typed, and my fingers go on auto-pilot for the others.  Ditto, for two/to/too, accept/except, etc...


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Sep 13, 2013)

Cadence said:


> I completely get that.  Whenever I'm typing, the first use of a (near) homophone seems to always determine the way the rest of them are spelled throughout the document.  So the first their/they're/there is typed, and my fingers go on auto-pilot for the others.  Ditto, for two/to/too, accept/except, etc...




I'm not generally bothered by mixed up homophones, at least in informal writing.

Mixing up homophones is, statistically, the single most common mistake. It's understandable. I do it all the time, and I _know _the differences. When you're an experienced typist, you don't actually think about the spelling of words, just the words themselves. Your fingers simply pound out the word and move on.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Sep 13, 2013)

> Ditto, for two/to/too...




...and "tew"

OK, nobody actually makes *that* mistake often enough to include it, but it, too, is a homophne of that word.


----------



## Weather Report (Sep 13, 2013)

Message boards have made me twitch with the following (not the words or phrases fault):

-Fallacious/fallacy

-Ergo

-Pray Tell

-Verisimilitude

-Disingenuous

-I don't think it means what you think it means (I love _The Princess Bride_, but stop it, now).

-Sans

-Gish

And some others I forget.


----------



## Weather Report (Sep 13, 2013)

jasper said:


> I think I going to lose my  mind the next I see loose to mean lose. Or should I loosen up already.





"Loosen" and "unloosen" mean the same thing (yeah, the English language needs editing).


----------



## billd91 (Sep 13, 2013)

I can accept when someone types voilà without the accent. The method of putting a diacritical mark on a bit of text is usually not very user friendly. But I find it weird when people spell it viola or, even more strangely, walla.

With respect to viola, that may just be a transposition error when typing (like rouge for rogue and many other examples) but it happens enough that I think many of the people typing it may just not know better.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 13, 2013)

Weather Report said:


> "Loosen" and "unloosen" mean the same thing (yeah, the English language needs editing).




Likewise "flammable" and "inflammable".


----------



## Weather Report (Sep 13, 2013)

MarkB said:


> Likewise "flammable" and "inflammable".




Bingo, and what is with the letter C (its only use is the "Chuh" sound)?

I say we go more Germanic:

Karp
Karpentry
Kreativity
Kaption
Krap

Etc, etc...


----------



## TwoSix (Sep 13, 2013)

Baron Greystone said:


> It's. As a possessive.






Weather Report said:


> Bingo, and what is with the letter C (*it's* only use is the "Chuh" sound)?




Its.


----------



## Herschel (Sep 13, 2013)

As far as game terms: 
Gish is specific to Githyanki, not a general term. 
RAW, considering how many rules debates there are and the nature of lawyers in general.


Real Life: Actually know the words you are using and what you're actually saying. If your business has changed names you may have to provide a "One AND the same" letter, not "one in the same".  The song is also not "Secret Asian Man". 

Get your subject/noun/verb straight: 
A bartender is tending (the) bar. 

Also, for plurals:
Brothers-in-Law
Powers-of-Attorney
Runs-Batted-In

Borrow vs. Lend: Borrow from, lend to, get it straight. 

From the lazy and rude standpoint: 

"Textspeak" in writing, especially in business correspondences. It's "you are" or "you're" not "ur".

Acronyms without same-page establishment. Whether you made it up or not, always establish what the acronym means before using it. There are enough communications issues in the world without thinking some pseudo-arcane jargon makes something sound more impressive.


----------



## lutecius (Sep 13, 2013)

English isn't my first language so obviously I'm in no position to go Grammar nazi on anyone here but I do find some spelling mistakes horribly grating, like "diety", affect/effect or "definately". Maybe that's just because those vowels wouldn't sound the same at all in French.


----------



## Weather Report (Sep 13, 2013)

TwoSix said:


> Its.




We can do without posts like this: pedantic douchery, just keep to the topic...

But I will edit, so posters such as yourself don't chime in with this sort of post-wasting crapola...


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Sep 13, 2013)

> ..."diety"...




The gods _are_ vain, you know...


----------



## Weather Report (Sep 13, 2013)

Herschel said:


> As far as game terms:
> Gish is specific to Githyanki, not a general term.




Yes, thank you.


----------



## TwoSix (Sep 13, 2013)

Weather Report said:


> We can do without posts like this: pedantic douchery, just keep to the topic...
> 
> But I will edit, so posters such as yourself don't chime in with this sort of post-wasting crapola...



Hey now, pedantic douchery is the _raison d'etre_ of Internet posting!  On a thread devoted to pedantic douchery, no less.   Ergo, I don't think "post-wasting crapola" means what you think it means.

I will now leave, sans a gish reference.


----------



## Weather Report (Sep 13, 2013)

Ha, almsot_ Animal House_, but not that cool/funny!

The emoticons are cheap (as aways...).


----------



## lutecius (Sep 13, 2013)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> The gods _are_ vain, you know...



hm... so that's why Orcus couldn't join the club.


----------



## Cadence (Sep 13, 2013)

Weather Report said:


> We can do without posts like this: pedantic douchery, just keep to the topic...
> 
> But I will edit, so posters such as yourself don't chime in with this sort of post-wasting crapola...




I don't know what would annoy me more... me always thinking things are irony when they aren't, or me using a meaning of irony that's been in common usage for generations and finding out that the people who complain about it are just being overly sensitive.

Anyway, something akin-to-irony seems relevant here.


----------



## TwoSix (Sep 13, 2013)

Cadence said:


> I don't know what would annoy me more... me always thinking things are irony when they aren't, or me using a meaning of irony that's been in common usage for generations and finding out that the people who complain about it are just being overly sensitive.
> 
> Anyway, something akin-to-irony seems relevant here.



Certainly akin.  I'd go with kissing cousins.


----------



## Savage Wombat (Sep 13, 2013)

Told you this thread would work.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 13, 2013)

Weather Report said:


> We can do without posts like this: pedantic douchery, just keep to the topic...
> 
> But I will edit, so posters such as yourself don't chime in with this sort of post-wasting crapola...





*Rule #1:  Keep it civil.*


----------



## jonesy (Sep 13, 2013)

I don't have a problem with the rouge rogue thing, maybe because most people I've played with don't have english as their first language. It's prevalent and understandable. The english spelling makes no sense when you don't know the etymology (and why would you?).

Personally I have a problem with people using the word 'actually' when there's no need for it. Which is ironic because I've actually noticed myself overusing the damn thing. It creeps in when I'm not looking at what I'm actually typing.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Sep 14, 2013)

Weather Report said:


> Bingo, and what is with the letter C (its only use is the "Chuh" sound)?




C is for cookie, that's good enough for me ...

Rouge doesn't bother me since I normally assume that it's a typo (like "teh" which I see often as well).  If it were an intentional use it might grate.

Now critique "my hat of d02 know no limit" ...


----------



## jonesy (Sep 14, 2013)

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Now critique "my hat of d02 know no limit" ...



Seems cromulent.


Edit:

No, wait. It's supposed to be hate, not hat. He said 'hate of d02'.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 14, 2013)

Weather Report said:


> "Loosen" and "unloosen" mean the same thing (yeah, the English language needs editing).



I think a few thousand of my brain cells just unloosened themselves as a result of this revelation. 

A lot like they did when I learned that 'uncavalier' is an adjective, but 'cavalier' is not.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 14, 2013)

Herschel said:


> Acronyms without same-page establishment. Whether you made it up or not, always establish what the acronym means before using it. There are enough communications issues in the world without thinking some pseudo-arcane jargon makes something sound more impressive.



Oh gods, we need less of this!

Also less letter-sharing in the engineering/science world would make me very happy. Last year a professor had the gall to criticize my previous school's engineering department, which taught me to use 'i' for 'imaginary' rather than 'j.' How silly of them!


----------



## Cadence (Sep 14, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> A lot like they did when I learned that 'uncavalier' is an adjective, but 'cavalier' is not.




Huh-what?


----------



## dd.stevenson (Sep 14, 2013)

Most of my pet hates are flame war starters. 

But I can safely declare that I dislike when people use LOL to mean they're mildly bemused. Also: any fantasy name that's a recombination of the letters 'D' 'R' 'I' 'Z' 'Z' 'T'.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 14, 2013)

Weather Report said:


> Bingo, and what is with the letter C (its only use is the "Chuh" sound)?
> 
> I say we go more Germanic:



I'm so onboard with this! And while we're at it, let's scrap Q and X.

Y is not a vowel. Ever. It's a dirty changeling, as so many English letters are.

English needs to officially recognize ZH as a character, because it's ridiculous to use a sound often enough and yet not have a character for it.

Come to think of it, we need a few more vowels too. The vowel sound in 'could' is neither an O or a U, nor even an L, for starters.

(If anyone links to that corny Mark Twain joke, I swear I'll literally reach through the screen and slap the smug off your face. )


----------



## Tovec (Sep 14, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> Last year a professor had the gall to criticize my previous school's engineering department, which taught me to use 'i' for 'imaginary' rather than 'j.' How silly of them!



Huh? What? How? But.. What? 'j' is right?? Since when? Then again.. Pluto isn't a planet anymore so what do I know. Oh, Pluto is Greek, not Roman as I always thought. Completely tangential I know but it is news to me.



Cadence said:


> Huh-what?




I think..
Uncavalier is when I push an old lady into the mud.
Cavalier is when I ride a horse and am a specific DnD class.

Am I right  @_*Tequila Sunrise*_  ?

EDIT: I find this funny how it went from "stuff that annoys you" to "stupidity of the english language." Really quickly too.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 14, 2013)

Cadence said:


> Huh-what?



Oops, my bad.

'Cavalier' is both a noun and an adjective, and 'uncavalier' is neither. Which is strange, because it makes the perfect counterpart to the 'cavalier' adjective.


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Sep 14, 2013)

Herschel said:


> Acronyms without same-page establishment. Whether you made it up or not, always establish what the acronym means before using it. There are enough communications issues in the world without thinking some pseudo-arcane jargon makes something sound more impressive.




This is important. Even if you think your audience probably knows the term, it's worth spelling it out the first time you use it just to be clear.

In many ways, it worth avoiding jargon as a general rule. Especially jargon that is really rhetoric, such as "mother may I" or "blink elf".


----------



## Cadence (Sep 14, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> 'Cavalier' is both a noun and an adjective, and 'uncavalier' is neither. Which is strange, because it makes the perfect counterpart to the 'cavalier' adjective.




Throw off the tyranny of the dictionary!

(Or check out the Wiktionary...  I'd never heard it before you posted it, but they have the un- one meaning just what you think it should.)

In game terms is Uncavalier to Anti-Paladin as Cavalier is to Paladin?


----------



## Weather Report (Sep 14, 2013)

Cadence said:


> I don't know what would annoy me more... me always thinking things are irony when they aren't, or me using a meaning of irony that's been in common usage for generations and finding out that the people who complain about it are just being overly sensitive.
> 
> Anyway, something akin-to-irony seems relevant here.




Is irony like iron but with bits of copper in it?


----------



## Weather Report (Sep 14, 2013)

Cadence said:


> In game terms is Uncavalier to Anti-Paladin as Cavalier is to Paladin?




Githyanki are the first Anti-paladins!


----------



## billd91 (Sep 14, 2013)

Weather Report said:


> Githyanki are the first Anti-paladins!




[Nitpick]Not if my memory serves. The anti-paladin NPC class appeared before the Fiend Folio.[/nitpick]


----------



## TwoSix (Sep 14, 2013)

billd91 said:


> [Nitpick]Not if my memory serves. The anti-paladin NPC class appeared before the Fiend Folio.[/nitpick]




I'm pretty sure this entire thread has the [Nitpick] tag.


----------



## Cadence (Sep 14, 2013)

billd91 said:


> [Nitpick]Not if my memory serves. The anti-paladin NPC class appeared before the Fiend Folio.[/nitpick]





Anti-Paladin in Dragon Magazine 39 - July 1980
vs.
Githyanki in White Dwarf 12 - April/May 1979 ?


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 14, 2013)

Cadence said:


> Throw off the tyranny of the dictionary!
> 
> (Or check out the Wiktionary...  I'd never heard it before you posted it, but they have the un- one meaning just what you think it should.)



Oh...I...I think I just had a religious experience. I have finally found my grammatical bible. Thank you for showing me the light, Cadence. 



Cadence said:


> In game terms is Uncavalier to Anti-Paladin as Cavalier is to Paladin?



Quick, somebody get James Jacobs on the phone. This idea is worth millions!

I'm only kind of kidding. D&D certainly has a strong tradition of writing whole new anti-classes and PrCs, rather than simply letting go of alignment restrictions.


----------



## thewok (Sep 14, 2013)

I've been tempted to have my players come across a herd of alots at some point.


----------



## Dwimmerlied (Sep 15, 2013)

What I can't stand is those upstart trans-alpine bumpkins with their pronunciation of suffixal "-us" as "-ix". By Jupiter it sounds so ridiculous I tell ya it drives me mad as Vulcan at a Pompeiian blasphemy! Why I even heard the britons have done away with suffixes altogether! Ludicrous!!!


----------



## Viking Bastard (Sep 15, 2013)

Ah, English. So easy to learn, so easily adjusted, so devoid of grammar, and _such a pain to spell_.

Being a non-native speaker, I have plentiful sympathy for the spellers of the language. If you don't read a lot, I'm not sure how you'd learn it, as there's so little rhyme or reason to it and you just have to remember it--so many sounds and so many words, but such a small alphabet.


----------



## Dioltach (Sep 15, 2013)

Another one that bugs me: improper use of much, many, little, few.


----------



## Weather Report (Sep 15, 2013)

And let's get rid of those unnecessary silent Gs, Ks, Ms, and that PH garbage.

Kan you now grab a nife, sit down, and play a nome filanthropist properly.


----------



## Gilladian (Sep 15, 2013)

Spelling mistakes drive me bonkers, but that's mostly a pet peeve - I realize that most of them are typos and I forgive them. What I hate is when people use the wrong word and don't EVER realize it. 

Led is the past tense of the verb "lead". Lead is a metal, and doesn't go anywhere.  Lose/loose is another one. I've seen people use them in exactly the opposite meaning. 

But the mistake I see all the time that drives me really bonkers, because it causes actual problems, is in the writing of instructions. People will MEAN to say "do this, not that", with long explanations of how to do/not do things. And then they leave the word NOT out of the sentence. I see this DAILY, both here and on the jewelry/craft forums where I hang out a lot. Please people, when you're giving instructions that can cause someone to waste a huge hunk of very expensive silver wire, reread your instructions! Just once!


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Sep 15, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> (snip) My second one is the notorious 'rouge.' Every time I see it in the context of a D&D discussion, I wonder how gamers can see 'rogue' printed a zillion times in their game books and still misspell it.  (snip)




I actually advocate, without a hint of irony, that anyone who uses _rouge_ instead of _rogue_ should be banned from ENWorld. It's just such a silly mistake.



Henry said:


> Another that just popped up in my mind -- "could  of" instead of "could've" or "could have." Common speech and internet  communications are full of malapropisms and mondegreens like this,  though.




Funnily enough, my Facebook friends who enjoy this particular malapropism are also the ones who can't use an apostrophe (see next quote) or think that _literally_ means _figuratively_. It's like they're monolingual in their second or third language.



Baron Greystone said:


> It's. As a possessive.
> 
> My blood pressure is rising just thinking about it.




Even worse, what about when an apostrophe is used before the letter S to create a plural? Arghhh....

Finally, _parley_ and _parlay_. The WotC writers only recently got this one right in the past couple of months. Clearly they had been conditioned by the actors on The Wire to think that _parley_ was spelt _parlay_ because that's how it's pronounced on The Wire.

Generally speaking, these sorts of things don't bother me too much except when they appear in a book I have paid for. In the days of d20 glut, one of the early signifiers that a product was going to suck was finding superfluous apostrophes on the first couple of pages.


----------



## Asmo (Sep 15, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> Savage Wombat wagered in the gish thread that if I started a thread about my grammatical pet peeves, I'd get plenty of sympathy hate. So I am.
> 
> My first one is a recent development: character option 'bloat.' I'm sorry, but bloat is a female problem. Options are icing on the game cake!
> 
> ...




"Here, here"!


----------



## MoxieFu (Sep 15, 2013)

Then and Than are not interchangeable words.

Also people very often use the word Ambivalent when they mean Indifferent. Those two words are not synonyms.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Sep 16, 2013)

Asmo said:


> "Here, here"!




Where?


----------



## jonesy (Sep 16, 2013)

MoxieFu said:


> Also people very often use the word Ambivalent when they mean Indifferent. Those two words are not synonyms.



In a way they could be, if you consider them both neutral states of mind. In the first you're not sure which way you feel about something and in the second you just don't care.


----------



## Henry (Sep 16, 2013)

Another just occurred to me tonight while skimming a reality TV show:

*"Take it to the next level." *I am developing an irrational dislike of this vapid, essentially meaningless phrase that people overuse because they think it makes them sound both trendy and "professional." UGH! I've seen its popularity rise in the past ten years, and I hope it leaves public usage soon.

However, in an RPG context, it's perfectly fine.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 16, 2013)

Scrivener of Doom said:


> Finally, _parley_ and _parlay_. The WotC writers only recently got this one right in the past couple of months. Clearly they had been conditioned by the actors on The Wire to think that _parley_ was spelt _parlay_ because that's how it's pronounced on The Wire.



I have to admit that until this thread, I thought that 'parlay' was just the way that Jack Sparrow says it.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 16, 2013)

Henry said:


> Another just occurred to me tonight while skimming a reality TV show:
> 
> *"Take it to the next level." *I am developing an irrational dislike of this vapid, essentially meaningless phrase that people overuse because they think it makes them sound both trendy and "professional." UGH! I've seen its popularity rise in the past ten years, and I hope it leaves public usage soon.



Oooh, good one.

I'm not a fan of any trend-lines, particularly 'In it to win it!'


----------



## jonesy (Sep 16, 2013)

Henry said:


> ..irrational dislike..



If it were irrational you wouldn't have proper reasons for it, but you just explained what they were.


----------



## Henry (Sep 16, 2013)

jonesy said:


> If it were irrational you wouldn't have proper reasons for it, but you just explained what they were.



I must say I miss Circvs' fist-rattling emoticon over here - it's tough to stage a proper rant without it.


----------



## jonesy (Sep 16, 2013)

Henry said:


> I must say I miss Circvs' fist-rattling emoticon over here - it's tough to stage a proper rant without it.


----------



## MoxieFu (Sep 16, 2013)

jonesy said:


> In a way they could be, if you consider them both neutral states of mind. In the first you're not sure which way you feel about something and in the second you just don't care.




No. Ambivalence is a strong emotional reaction involving inner conflict. Indifference is barely a reaction at all. They have almost opposite meanings.


----------



## Gilladian (Sep 16, 2013)

Another mistake that I use as a warning not to bother to read any further - misuse of forward for foreword. It is the word before the main text. Therefore foreword. Why is that so hard?


----------



## Impeesa (Sep 16, 2013)

One that I see all the time, but never seems to come up in conversations like this one, is palette, palate, and pallet. Nobody seems to know which is which, whether the topic at hand is art, food, or the subtleties of bulk shipping.


----------



## Orius (Sep 16, 2013)

Weather Report said:


> Bingo, and what is with the letter C (its only use is the "Chuh" sound)?




Blame that one on the Romans.



jonesy said:


> No, wait. It's supposed to be hate, not hat. He said 'hate of d02'.




It's an old EN World in-joke.  Many years ago some troll posted an anti-d20 rant filled with numerous grammatical errors.  "My hat of d02 know no limit" is about the only part of it anyone around here remembers because it was frequently quoted in jest.



Cadence said:


> In game terms is Uncavalier to Anti-Paladin as Cavalier is to Paladin?




So what kind of restrictions does the Uncavalier have?  Is he supposed to run from every single fight, like Brave Sir Robin?

Oh gawd, did I just make Holy Grail reference?



Viking Bastard said:


> Ah, English. So easy to learn, so easily adjusted, so devoid of grammar, and _such a pain to spell_.
> 
> Being a non-native speaker, I have plentiful sympathy for the spellers of the language. If you don't read a lot, I'm not sure how you'd learn it, as there's so little rhyme or reason to it and you just have to remember it--so many sounds and so many words, but such a small alphabet.




Most of the illogical stuff comes from older forms of English, particularly when early printing was capturing the inconsistant uses of early Modern English and the more learned were shoehorning in French features like silent letters.  Latin and Greek borrowings tend to to be spelled much more sensibly.


----------



## Impeesa (Sep 16, 2013)

Orius said:


> It's an old EN World in-joke.  Many years ago some troll posted an anti-d20 rant filled with numerous grammatical errors.  "My hat of d02 know no limit" is about the only part of it anyone around here remembers because it was frequently quoted in jest.




I think he knows that.


----------



## The Shadow (Sep 16, 2013)

I can't believe nobody's mentioned horde/hoard yet. Those two are confused constantly even by people who really should know better, and it drives me nuts!

One is an army, the other a treasure, people!


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Sep 16, 2013)

Gilladian said:


> Another mistake that I use as a warning not to bother to read any further - misuse of forward for foreword. It is the word before the main text. Therefore foreword. Why is that so hard?




I blame Gary.

It surprised me that a bloke with such an extensive vocabulary always got this wrong so I used to assume it was just the American spelling of _foreword_.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 16, 2013)

The Shadow said:


> I can't believe nobody's mentioned horde/hoard yet. Those two are confused constantly even by people who really should know better, and it drives me nuts!
> 
> One is an army, the other a treasure, people!




Yeah, I get annoyed by that one.

Funnily enough, the write-up of the D&D Next Green Dragon notes that, in addition to material wealth, it likes to collect individuals that it has manipulated into becoming its servants, considering them just another form of treasure. So if it collected enough of them, its hoard would also be its horde.


----------



## jonesy (Sep 16, 2013)

Orius said:


> It's an old EN World in-joke.  Many years ago some troll posted an anti-d20 rant filled with numerous grammatical errors.  "My hat of d02 know no limit" is about the only part of it anyone around here remembers because it was frequently quoted in jest.
> 
> 
> Impeesa said:
> ...



I did know. Or rather remember, since we had the photoshop thread here in 2004 that I took part in:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?86456-ENWorld-Photoshop-Challenge-Hate-of-d02/

This was my entry for it:
[sblock]
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




[/sblock]


----------



## Herschel (Sep 20, 2013)

These are majorly irritating, not because they're spelled incorrectly, but because they're flat-out WRONG: plurals. Singular is the same as plural for Eladrin, Dragonborn and Drow! They aren't Eladrins, Dragonborns and Drows!


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Sep 20, 2013)

Herschel said:


> These are majorly irritating, not because they're spelled incorrectly, but because they're flat-out WRONG: plurals. Singular is the same as plural for Eladrin, Dragonborn and Drow! They aren't Eladrins, Dragonborns and Drows!




The same rule applies to Lego.

It's Lego. Singular. Plural. It's always just Lego.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 20, 2013)

Scrivener of Doom said:


> The same rule applies to Lego.
> 
> It's Lego. Singular. Plural. It's always just Lego.



You just ruined my childhood. 

On a more (less?) serious note, it still sounds wrong when I hear someone say 'fishes,' 'peoples' and similar plurals, but at the same time I'm glad that common usage is shifting the English language toward one less confusing quirk.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Sep 21, 2013)

Tequila Sunrise said:


> You just ruined my childhood.
> 
> On a more (less?) serious note, it still sounds wrong when I hear someone say 'fishes,' 'peoples' and similar plurals, but at the same time I'm glad that common usage is shifting the English language toward one less confusing quirk.




"Maths".

Take the "s" from the Brits and slap it on Lego, and voila, you're happy!


----------



## Morrus (Sep 21, 2013)

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> "Maths".
> 
> Take the "s" from the Brits and slap it on Lego, and voila, you're happy!




Funny, I was going to say "math" and "Legos", both of which sound like toddler-speak to me!


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Sep 21, 2013)

Actually, neither _Lego _nor _Legos _is officially correct. The correct term is either _LEGO bricks _or _LEGO building blocks. _LEGO is only the brand name, not the name of the individual blocks. That said, I'll always say _Legos_.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Sep 21, 2013)

Jeff Carlsen said:


> Actually, neither _Lego _nor _Legos _is officially correct. The correct term is either _LEGO bricks _or _LEGO building blocks. _LEGO is only the brand name, not the name of the individual blocks. That said, I'll always say _Legos_.




Should't that be LEGO (R) Bricks (TM)?


----------



## Morrus (Sep 21, 2013)

Jeff Carlsen said:


> Actually, neither _Lego _nor _Legos _is officially correct. The correct term is either _LEGO bricks _or _LEGO building blocks. _LEGO is only the brand name, not the name of the individual blocks. That said, I'll always say _Legos_.




Fair enough! And you'll sound like a toddler to me!


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Sep 21, 2013)

Morrus said:


> Funny, I was going to say "math" and "Legos", both of which sound like toddler-speak to me!




Ditto.

My toddler won't be getting away with either (even though we live in a country that uses American "English").



Jeff Carlsen said:


> Actually, neither _Lego _nor _Legos _is officially correct. The correct term is either _LEGO bricks _or _LEGO building blocks. _LEGO is only the brand name, not the name of the individual blocks. That said, I'll always say _Legos_.




In the spirit of this thread, I will simply point out that you are wrong. 

Except about LEGO. Yes, it should be all capital letters.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Sep 21, 2013)

Hey, LEGO my Eggo!


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Sep 21, 2013)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Hey, LEGO my Eggo!




Like this?


----------



## sabrinathecat (Sep 21, 2013)

"Snuck". NNNNOoooooooooo! No No No no no no no no no. Bad, wrong, false. "Sneaked." "Snuck" is incorrect.
"thier". I think that one explains itself.
"alot" also explains itself.
"You Go, Girl" No, you go: go get a brain
"near miss" I loved Carlin's logic. "'Oh look, they nearly missed.' Yeah, but they still hit! When two objects come close to each other, but don't hit, that's a Near-HIT." "If fire fighters fight fire, and crime fighters fight crime, what to Freedom Fighters fight?" Oh, no wonder the USA is always supporting "freedom fighters," especially in countries the US gov't doesn't like.
Forte' pronounced "For-tay". Wrong. "Fort".
Touche' is also "Toush", not "Too-shay".
Yeah, just about any time some pompous twit is trying to show off, but mispronouncing a foreign word is grating.
Antidisestablishmentarianism is not the longest word in the English language. The actual longest word is some skin condition my last girlfriend was telling me about.
Just because something makes you feel sad, does not make it a tragedy. Sorry. Tragedy means when someone is brought down by a flaw in their own character. Bus driving off a cliff killing everyone on board: not a tragedy. Get over it.
"Communist" and "Socialist" are also victims of being badly misused within political discourse.
"Irregardless" um, not without regard? that's a double negative.
"Decimate" means to kill 1/10, not 9/10s.
Using plural for unspecified gender. Sorry, in the English language, masculine is the default. Period. Has been for centuries. Get over it. Other option is to use "it" or "a person".
Political Correctness is responsible for some truly horrific atrocities to the English Language.


----------



## n00bdragon (Sep 21, 2013)

sabrinathecat said:


> Just because something makes you feel sad, does not make it a tragedy. Sorry. Tragedy means when someone is brought down by a flaw in their own character. Bus driving off a cliff killing everyone on board: not a tragedy. Get over it.




Might be nitpicky but wouldn't a bus driving off a cliff actually be a tragedy then? The bus driver was, quite literally, brought *down* by a flaw in his character (being an insufficient driver).


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Sep 21, 2013)

sabrinathecat said:


> (snip) Using plural for unspecified gender. Sorry,  in the English language, masculine is the default. Period. Has been for  centuries. Get over it. Other option is to use "it" or "a person". Political Correctness is responsible for some truly horrific atrocities to the English Language.




I must admit, I prefer "they" to the relatively new practice of alternating between "he" and "she" we see in the D&D books. And, no, I am not claiming to be politically correct. 



n00bdragon said:


> Might be nitpicky but wouldn't a bus driving off a cliff actually be a tragedy then? The bus driver was, quite literally, brought *down* by a flaw in his character (being an insufficient driver).




Or was it the triumph of the cliff?

After all, the cliff proved itself to be the cliffiest of cliffs.


----------



## Weather Report (Sep 21, 2013)

Scrivener of Doom said:


> It's Lego. Singular. Plural. It's always just Lego.





_LEGO _rules.


----------



## sabrinathecat (Sep 21, 2013)

For the bus driver, maybe. Or maybe it was a case of the tire blowing out at the wrong time?
For the tourists, however, no, definitely not a tragedy. If anything, what a way to go! Here they are, having a good time, then suddenly kaboom! Everything is over. We should be so lucky. (OK, not quite as good as a heart attack during sex, but still not a bad way to go.)

There was a great couple of books called "Central Casting: Heroes _____" for generating random character histories. First 2 books were all done using proper English. Third book went to default female, and slapped in all manner of PCisms that were at best unfortunate. 3rd Ed D&D did a decent job of alternating the examples. 4e lost something in the transition.


----------



## Cadence (Sep 21, 2013)

RE: LEGO - My little one got several sets for his birthday and, whatever they're officially called, they're all over the floor in the room that's suitable for gaming (fire trucks, coast guard, police helicopter.... he's an addict).  And I think I've seen every official Lego City movie more times than should be legally allowed.   http://city.lego.com/en-us/movies/mini-movies/coast-guard


----------



## Cadence (Sep 21, 2013)

sabrinathecat said:


> Using plural for unspecified gender. Sorry, in the English language, masculine is the default. Period. Has been for centuries. Get over it. Other option is to use "it" or "a person".   Political Correctness is responsible for some truly horrific atrocities to the English Language.




I refuse to bow to the 18th-century grammar police and their Latin fetish, and when someone complains about it I tell them exactly where they can go (to any number of links like these). 

http://motivatedgrammar.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/singular-they-and-the-many-reasons-why-its-correct/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/t...-is-wrong-please-do-tell-them-to-get-stuffed/
http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austheir.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
http://www.economist.com/blogs/johnson/2013/01/grammar

And, isn't indicating that you are unsure of the person's gender or leaving it unspecified when it could be either in fact more correct ("_n accordance with fact, truth, or reason; free from error; exact, true, accurate; right."), with no political dogmatics required.

I will happily take correction of my often horrible comma usage._


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Sep 22, 2013)

Regarding "Forté"/"Forte"/"Fort": it's all a mess anyway.

http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19971114


----------



## sabrinathecat (Sep 22, 2013)

I'd rather have a new pronoun specifically for indeterminate than to incorrectly use plural. If the Language institutions can agree on one, fine, I'll use it. Until then, you may not like the 18th century rules, but they are the rules. If you don't like it, try Esperanto or Japanese, or a language which doesn't really use possessives or gender or personal pronouns.

I can't help but notice that the first few of the articles I read from the links are just as obnoxious and condescending as the people they target. Funny that. And of course, many of the sources sited are from times that either predate any attempt to standardize (Chaucer) or poet playwrights (Shakespeare) for whom some latitude must be allowed (also for the fact that both of them were frickin' brilliant). And then there's the King James bible, which can be dismissed out of hand as a source for anything, seeing as how there are gross mistranslations rife in it because James wanted to use the Bible as a political weapon (most infamous being "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live", because King James wanted to wipe out any non-catholic practice, so "Witch" was used instead of "Poisoner of the Blood"--aka Court Assassin).

Oh, technically, the plural of Octopus should be Octopodes, because otherwise you'd be mixing greek and latin, which you aren't supposed to do, but then we have words like "macadamize" which combines Scottish with Hebrew with... oh, never mind.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Sep 22, 2013)

Regarding "Touché"/"Tousch": http://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/pronunciation/american/touche

http://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/pronunciation/british/touche

http://i.word.com/idictionary/touché


----------



## Cadence (Sep 22, 2013)

sabrinathecat said:


> I'd rather have a new pronoun specifically for indeterminate than to incorrectly use plural. If the Language institutions can agree on one, fine, I'll use it. Until then, you may not like the 18th century rules, but they are the rules.




Since English doesn't have a language regulator or institution like the French to undisputedly determine the rules and define incorrectness, are self-appointed style guides that have found wide acceptance all we have to guide us?   (They're what made the rules in the 1800s, right?)

So what happens when Strunk and White, APA, MLA, Chicago Manual of Style, or AP disagree?  ("carry-over" or "carryover", "the duchess' style" or "the duchess's style", final comma or not in a series, etc...).

How many style guides need to change sides on something before it flips from correct to incorrect or vice versa? Is it now ok to split infinitives?  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_infinitive#Current_views 

Chicago currently says, "good writers" would make the subjects plural to avoid use of gender neutral he and go to "he or she" when that can't be done.  http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/Pronouns.html?page=1   and for one edition said singular they was fine (and then backed off).   Down the road, if enough style guides say singular they is the way to go... will that make the he-holdouts incorrect?




sabrinathecat said:


> Oh, technically, the plural of Octopus should be Octopodes, because otherwise you'd be mixing greek and latin, which you aren't supposed to do, but then we have words like "macadamize" which combines Scottish with Hebrew with... oh, never mind.




Made me go google both and I stumbled across http://boingboing.net/2010/07/27/octopuses-octopi-oct.html , the word hypercorrection , and all kinds of things I didn't know about the history of road building along the way - that seems like too many new things learned for a Saturday!   (The Merriam-Webster video folks don't seem to like a lot of the 18th century language police).


----------



## tuxgeo (Sep 22, 2013)

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> C is for cookie, that's good enough for me ...
> 
> Rouge doesn't bother me since I normally assume that it's a typo (like "teh" which I see often as well).  If it were an intentional use it might grate. < snip >




"Teh" is sometimes intentional. The main character of the Webcomic "Questionable Content" (Martin) often wears a "TEH" T-shirt (still available from topatoco through their Merchandise section). Is it ironic that he's doing it intentionally? Is he intentionally doing it ironically? Is it great that he's free to grate by doing it? 

All these questions, and more, answered -- never.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 22, 2013)

sabrinathecat said:


> Using plural for unspecified gender. Sorry, in the English language, masculine is the default. Period. Has been for centuries. Get over it. Other option is to use "it" or "a person".



This debate reminds me of one M:tG topic a while back, about the practice of certain players to call their cards "him" regardless of the gender of the character in the artwork. As in, "I tap him [Serra Angel] to deal you 4 damage."

(I know it's not really the same thing; I'm just saying.)

I honestly didn't even know there was a debate about using plurals for unspecified gender. And I have a BA in English, and was raised by a grammar-sensitive English teacher.



sabrinathecat said:


> "Snuck". NNNNOoooooooooo! No No No no no no no no no. Bad, wrong, false. "Sneaked." "Snuck" is incorrect.



'Sneaked' sounds 100% wrong to me, but 'sneaked' is another word that I like from a 'this makes sense' point of view. Amusingly, my auto-checker isn't offended by either.



sabrinathecat said:


> Touche' is also "Toush", not "Too-shay".



Is that ou pronounced like the ou in 'south,' or like the oo in 'too'? Or perhaps even like the ou in 'would'?



sabrinathecat said:


> Yeah, just about any time some pompous twit is trying to show off, but mispronouncing a foreign word is grating.



Or just pronouncing foreign words in ways that would sound perfectly normal in their native country, but sound weird here. Like omitting the S in 'Paris,' and giving it that French...whatever that almost-R sound is.


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Sep 22, 2013)

I don't like the singular _they_, and I avoid it in formal writing. But I also know it's a losing battle, and I don't have a problem with it in casual speech.

Usually, if the gender isn't known because it was never assigned, I assign one and stick with it for the example. I'll often give my example person a name, which generally makes for a more concrete example.

If the gender is unknown because it is supposed to be a mystery, then I use _he or she._


----------



## sabrinathecat (Sep 22, 2013)

Language is one of those funny things.
If someone were to take all of the history books (except one kept safely hidden away) and destroy them, then publish a new version that convinced everyone that the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria set sail in 1245, and everyone came to believe that for 100 years, would it change the actual date when Columbus stumbled onto American shores? Well, no. And the reaction when the last original history book with the correct information might puzzle scholars, but it does not alter time.
Likewise, if you convince children that 2+2=5, and teach that in math for 100 years until everyone believes it, it doesn't change actual math (but would lead to some pretty funny physics papers!).
With Language, however, the main argument seems to be whatever the most people believe to be correct is in fact correct.  And this is a science? No, most colleges I know refer to it as Linguistic Arts.

But I'm also one of those obscene people that believes in pronouncing both R's in February, and frequently wince at news announcers who don't.


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Sep 22, 2013)

Cadence said:


> RE: LEGO - My little one got several sets for his birthday and, whatever they're officially called, they're all over the floor in the room that's suitable for gaming (fire trucks, coast guard, police helicopter.... he's an addict).  And I think I've seen every official Lego City movie more times than should be legally allowed.   http://city.lego.com/en-us/movies/mini-movies/coast-guard




It's always a pleasure to read about parents who are raising their children properly.

Lego all over the floor meets the basic test of "properly". 

I'm looking forward to when my son is a bit older and he can do the same.


----------



## sabrinathecat (Sep 22, 2013)

What about adults who still have lego everywhere without children involved?


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Sep 22, 2013)

sabrinathecat said:


> What about adults who still have lego everywhere without children involved?




That's called _living the dream_.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Sep 22, 2013)

sabrinathecat said:


> What about adults who still have lego everywhere without children involved?




Not allowed.  You must immediately box up all LEGO products and ship them to ... my place.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Sep 22, 2013)

Oh, since I just saw it in another thread: "toon" outside of the game _Toon_.

What is this, _Roger Rabbit_?


----------



## sabrinathecat (Sep 23, 2013)

Scrivener of Doom said:


> That's called _living the dream_.




No wife, no kids, just a cat, a mortgage covered by the other half of the duplex paying rent, and whatever lego sets my crap job makes it possible for me to buy...


----------



## jeffh (Sep 23, 2013)

I used to sig ones I noticed a lot on other posts here. Some that I remember doing that with or at least being tempted to:
Saying "loose" (the opposite of "tight") when you obviously mean "lose" (the opposite of "win" or "gain"). Just one of the many editing problems that made me stop trying to understand the very promising Final Fantasy Zero project, for one thing. (Though the main one was that I couldn't figure out how you generate a character's ability scores - and the fact that they change names from one page to the next sure didn't help.)
Confusing "breath" with "breathe" (e.g. writing "I can't breath")
Using the non-word "boni" instead of "bonuses" was popular for a while. Thankfully, this one seems to have faded back into well-deserved obscurity.
"For all intensive purposes". I don't know why the fact that it makes *no sense* doesn't tip people off that they're using this incorrectly. The correct phrase is "for all intents and purposes".
"Effect" and "affect"
There's probably a lot more, but I can't think of them off the top of my head.

Oh, and people who insist that it's wrong to use singular "they" for a person whose gender is unknown or irrelevant. Some of these incorrect "corrections" are just as annoying as any actual mistake. This usage has been accepted for centuries and can be found in some of the greatest writers in the history of the English language. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it except that some people have an irrational bug up their butt about it. I'm avoiding it wherever possible in Fantasy Infinity, but that's only because I know it does annoy a lot of people; but I'm not going to sweat it if the occasional singular "they" makes it in.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Sep 23, 2013)

R.I.F.- Rage is fundamental.


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Sep 25, 2013)

It's time for a quick rant.
_
Alot_ is not a word.

_A lot_ is two words.

_Allot_ is a word but it is not related to _a lot_.


----------



## Al'Kelhar (Sep 26, 2013)

A is different _to_ B.

A is _not_ different _than_ B.

Stoopid American TV infiltrating our Pristine Grammar.

Question - Am I bringing up my boys properly if they have _their_ Lego, and I have _mine_ - the former being scattered all over the floor, while the latter being beautifully crafted into impressive Star Wars sets that are taken down off the shelf and played with only with express permission and subject to strict rules about the standard in which they are returned to said shelf?

Cheers, Al'Kelhar


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Sep 26, 2013)

Al'Kelhar said:


> (snip) Question - Am I bringing up my boys properly if they have _their_ Lego, and I have _mine_ - the former being scattered all over the floor, while the latter being beautifully crafted into impressive Star Wars sets that are taken down off the shelf and played with only with express permission and subject to strict rules about the standard in which they are returned to said shelf? (snip)




Not only are you raising them properly, you are setting an example that other parents should emulate.

How I wish there were parents like you in the country where I now live....


----------



## jeffh (Sep 26, 2013)

Al'Kelhar said:


> A is different _to_ B.
> 
> A is _not_ different _than_ B.
> 
> Stoopid American TV infiltrating our Pristine Grammar.




"Different to" is British, and not universally accepted even there. "Different than" is US. Both, especially the latter, are generally considered fairly informal, with "different _from_" preferred in formal contexts on both sides of the Atlantic.


----------



## Al'Kelhar (Sep 26, 2013)

jeffh said:


> ...For all intensive purposes". I don't know why the fact that it makes *no sense* doesn't tip people off that they're using this incorrectly. The correct phrase is "for all intents and purposes".
> 
> ...
> 
> There's probably a lot more, but I can't think of them off the top of my head.




How about "commonal garden" for "common or garden" or "common, garden-variety..."?  Again, the fact that "commonal" is not even a word doesn't seem to figure in people's use of the phrase.

Cheers, Al'Kelhar


----------



## Savage Wombat (Sep 26, 2013)

Al'Kelhar said:


> How about "commonal garden" for "common or garden" or "common, garden-variety..."?  Again, the fact that "commonal" is not even a word doesn't seem to figure in people's use of the phrase.




Maybe someone doesn't know how to pronounce "communal"?  I don't know, I don't hear people use "garden-variety" much anymore around here.


----------



## corwyn77 (Sep 28, 2013)

I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned:

Apostrophes used to "pluralize" words.

Not wrong, so much, as just bugs me:

Going forward. It's freaking everywhere.


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Sep 28, 2013)

corwyn77 said:


> I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned:
> 
> Apostrophes used to "pluralize" words. (snip)




I think it was the first thing I mentioned.


----------



## lutecius (Sep 29, 2013)

sabrinathecat said:


> Forte' pronounced "For-tay". Wrong. "Fort".
> Touche' is also "Toush", not "Too-shay".
> Yeah, just about any time some pompous twit is trying to show off, but mispronouncing a foreign word is grating.



erm, no.

Forte (no accent) is Italian and pronounced "for-tay".

Touché (acute accent) is French and pronounced "too-shay (touche, pronounced "toosh", also exists but not in the same context).


----------



## Baron Greystone (Sep 29, 2013)

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Like this?
> 
> View attachment 59041




That is so cool!!!


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Sep 29, 2013)

At the end of the day, I'm getting tired of "at the end of the day."


...Like, _totally._


----------



## sabrinathecat (Sep 30, 2013)

I think the worst thing I've seen on TV (aside from The Doctor saying "snuck") was the Queen of England running down the beach to (Sir) Francis Drake calling out "Is it Him?"  AAAARRRRRrrrgh. "Is it HE." Subjective case plus linking verb! The Queen of Bloody England would have had that drummed into her head since childhood.
"It's him", "It's her", and "It's them" are all wrong.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 30, 2013)

I receive e-mail bulletins from Sky about upcoming TV programmes. The most recent one included an ad for The Face, emblazoned with the question "Who's Team Are You On?"

I notice that when I view it today with the content re-downloaded, it's been corrected. Someone caught the error, at least.


----------



## sabrinathecat (Oct 1, 2013)

Sign outside a private school: "Whom do you want teaching your child?" How about someone that understands basic grammar?

By  the same token, while I like the thought behind it, the paw-shaped  decals on the backs of cars with "Who rescued who?" does bug me.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Oct 2, 2013)

MarkB said:


> "Who's Team Are You On?"




Who's team.  You know, the team for which Who plays first.


----------



## Baron Greystone (Oct 2, 2013)

I know only one Australian.

Yet on a daily basis I am bombarded with people who say, "No worries."

CUT IT OUT!


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Oct 2, 2013)

Baron Greystone said:


> I know only one Australian.
> 
> Yet on a daily basis I am bombarded with people who say, "No worries."
> 
> CUT IT OUT!




Hehe. I am Australian. I miss hearing this. (I lived in Singapore for a decade+ before this and I was used to Australian-educated Singaporeans saying it to me quite frequently.  )


----------



## Cadence (Nov 19, 2013)

One of the things I've run into lately is people who correct or point out "mistakes" that aren't.  The most recent was on FB yesterday where someone was ripping whoever made a  sign about "Wilful or malicious destruction..." instead of "Willful".

Of course the OED marks it as the preferred spelling, it shows up as an accepted alternative in the standard desk top American dictionaries, it spell checks ok on MS word, it was more common than the two-l spelling until the middle of the last century in the US, and it's still apparently the main spelling outside the US.   

Ironically (?), ENWorld spell checks it as wrong


----------



## Starfox (Nov 20, 2013)

MarkB said:


> “The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.”
> ― James Nicoll



The question is; who mugged who.

Coming from Scandinavia, I must point out that some of our words were knocked into English by viking invaders, and later you got fed some French (much of it culinary) by another group of vikings (and their descendants) from the part of France that still carries the name of the northmen; Normandy. What is strange about the Normans is that they adopted French in just a few generations, but it took them hundreds of years to adopt English.


----------



## Morrus (Nov 20, 2013)

Cadence said:


> Ironically (?), ENWorld spell checks it as wrong




EN World doesn't spell check anything.  That'll be your browser.


----------



## Cadence (Nov 20, 2013)

Morrus said:


> EN World doesn't spell check anything.  That'll be your browser.




Gack.  MS (Word) being more enlightened than Google (Chrome) seems wrong!


----------



## Savage Wombat (Nov 20, 2013)

Everyone still hate everything on this thread?  Good!


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Nov 20, 2013)

Savage Wombat said:


> Everyone still hate everything on this thread?  Good!




I like to return to this thread to feed my ire on those rare weeks where no one omits an Oxford comma.


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Nov 21, 2013)

Starfox said:


> The question is; who mugged who. (snip)




Who mugged whom?


----------



## Scrivener of Doom (Nov 21, 2013)

Jeff Carlsen said:


> I like to return to this thread to feed my ire on those rare weeks where no one omits an Oxford comma.




I don't use Oxford commas but I do have my pet hates.

"It's" as the possessive form of "it" is making a horrible comeback. It's like a bug in a favourite piece of software. However, I am glad to see that "rouge" instead of "rogue" seems to have died a natural death.


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Nov 21, 2013)

Scrivener of Doom said:


> I don't use Oxford commas but I do have my pet hates.
> 
> "It's" as the possessive form of "it" is making a horrible comeback. It's like a bug in a favourite piece of software. However, I am glad to see that "rouge" instead of "rogue" seems to have died a natural death.




I can't get too annoyed over those because their easy mistakes even when you know the correct rules.

Not using Oxford commas is a choice. One for which you will burn in grammar hell for all eternity.


----------



## steeldragons (Nov 21, 2013)

Jeff Carlsen said:


> I can't get too annoyed over those because *their* easy mistakes even when you know the correct rules.




You did that on purpose right? ...RIGHT!!??!!


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Nov 21, 2013)

steeldragons said:


> You did that on purpose right? ...RIGHT!!??!!




Mwahaha!


----------



## MarkB (Nov 21, 2013)

I tend to find myself using commas, or sometimes dashes - or occasionally both together - too frequently when writing, to break up long sentences. After writing a long paragraph, I sometimes have to go back over what I've written and pick out extraneous punctuation.


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Nov 21, 2013)

MarkB said:


> I tend to find myself using commas, or sometimes dashes - or occasionally both together - too frequently when writing, to break up long sentences. After writing a long paragraph, I sometimes have to go back over what I've written and pick out extraneous punctuation.




I'd say that's a common trend among professionally intermediate writers. You have a strong sense of the tools, but haven't developed a habit of concise writing yet. I wouldn't be surprised if your love of the dash comes alongside an overuse of the semi-colon.


----------

