Harvard linguist points out the 58 most commonly misused words and phrases

But is he a cunning linguist?

yes, as a matter of fact I am 12 years old. Why do you ask?

1 Like

British English speaker here. I find “I could care less” doesn’t grate, and actually makes sense, if I interpret it as sarcasm.

3 Likes

Bingo. I like to take it further, and point out that even a disinterested judge may not be unbiased or impartial: he/she may have an irrational prejudice against one of the parties.

Were you by any chance frozen in a glacier about a hundred years ago and thawed out only recently?

THIS. it takes all the fun out of being a pedant.

2 Likes

I’m feeling smug because I was only caught out by “homogeneous/homogenous” and “stanch/staunch”, and oxforddictionaries.com says that in each case the second is an acceptable variant (and my somewhat elderly copy of the Shorter OED agrees in the case of “stanch/staunch”).

1 Like

(We) American people argue about this all the time, but I don’t think anyone considers “could care less” to be the “US version” of the phrase.

1 Like

I don’t think I have ever seen/heard ‘careen’ used as ‘career’. That would indeed be annoying. Although, sometimes careers do seem to careen a bit.

3 Likes

Of course it can be used figuratively, and often is. I think the (losing) battle of people who get annoyed at the “his eyes literally popped out of his head in surprise” kind of use might be something like this: when you can’t use “literally” anymore to distinguish a thing that actually happened from what didn’t really, then how do you convey it? “Actually, truthfully literally” is a bit awkward to fit in there. Yeah, over time words mean what people want them to. But it’s a kind of sentence modifier arms race that’s not really necessary and the literal meaning of literal seems to be a sad casualty.

On the other hand, it’s often the funny kind of wrong. I recently read a road bike review that included two instances of “quite literally” in a row, one fully legit in my view and the other fairly unambiguous in context but just asking for it.

The brakes are non branded dual callipers which are quite literally crap and at times downright scary. Soapbox time I’m afraid… on a bike designed primarily for beginners is it common sense to downgrade the one component that is quite literally a lifesaver?

One of the comments:

CALL THE ‘LITERALLY’ POLICE!

Unless the brakes are actually carved from faeces, that is.

/pedantry

I laughed.

4 Likes

It would. I usually think of it as “the kind of opinion currently considered acceptably progressive and culturally sensitive enough to avoid any sort of polemic”.

Which, of course, means it’s often cynically used to hide what one really thinks in the sort of society that pretends to promote the free exchange of ideas but will lazily, thoughtlessly converge towards a vague notion of which ones are right and crucify anyone caught in public with “wrong”, unfashionable ones. But that’s another issue.

1 Like

One that’s bugs me a bit is how people use “tabled” to mean “stopped discussing”… when in fact “tabled” means “brought up for discussion”, and “shelved” means “stopped discussing”.

4 Likes

Knock knock.
Who’s there?
To.
To who?
To WHOM.

11 Likes

Just remember an umpire should be disinterested, but never uninterested.
The Economist Style Guide is a worthy addition to any bookshelf.

4 Likes

4 Likes

I think that’s more a US/UK English difference, like “moot”.

1 Like

He actually seems to be using parameter in the mathematical sense – as in x in f(x) is a parameter. What he objects to is the use of “parameter” in the empty business-drone sense of “we need to work within the parameters”.

1 Like

Hey, he pointed out 58 common misuses, not…

1 Like

I have used the verb “essay” in the title of an English paper just to fuck with the teacher.

How can you write that this is three essays when it is clearly only one?

1 Like

Do you have a point other than the pokey thing on top of your head?

It’s sarcasm, isn’t it? I mean, irony.