# Acceptable English grammar/semantics that you hate **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [May 23, 2024, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984 "2024-05-23T20:21:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2024, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/141 "2024-05-26T15:27:57Z")
> [@Yosh99](#): > > “The building was **decimated** by the tornado”. Meaning that 90% is still intact? “Decimated” doesn’t mean that in English. It means that in Latin, but we’re not speaking Latin. There is a less/fewer distinction to it, though. I would use decimated for “greatly reduced in number” not as a direct synonym for destruction. English is aggressive in its acquisition of loan words, but it cares little about retaining their original definitions. “Chai” doesn’t just mean “tea.” “Salsa” doesn’t just mean “sauce.” ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2024, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/142 "2024-05-28T01:24:58Z")
> [@Hampshire](#): > > The acceptance of double negatives drives me nuts. Time for an old joke. Many languages use a double negative that, unlike in English, is just an intensifier and does not make the statement a positive one, but no language uses a double positive to make a negative statement. From the back of the room he then hears, “Yeah … right.” ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2024, 7:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/143 "2024-05-30T07:11:14Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > In the past five years or so I’ve noticed a trend towards saying “thank you” twice in a row, I.e.; > > “Here’s your food.” > “Thank you thank you!” > > I don’t know why, but it rubs me the wrong way and I find it annoying. On a related note, instances in which I am thanked (for whatever reason) with “I appreciate it” seem to be getting less frequent, and supplanted with “I appreciate _you_.” Wassup with that? ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2024, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/144 "2024-05-30T07:20:25Z")
> [@JKellyMap](#): > > > [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](#): > > > > “Aren’t I. . .” > > Ugh! > > You think we should say “Amn’t I”? Or must we avoid a contraction for this, and say “Am I not”? > > (I never noticed until now that we use “are” for this…no, it isn’t logically consistent with the paradigm, but it IS correct and ubiquitous. I assume it arose centuries ago, to avoid the “mnt” consonant cluster.) My understanding is that this is where the word _ain’t_ comes in… …and the “respectable” words all edge over to the other end of the bench. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2024, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/145 "2024-05-30T07:57:45Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > > [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > > > Style guides and editors could exist solely because those who wrote words that the public saw were an infinitesimal segment of the daily word flood. > > > > That statement is no longer true. The vast public has been let loose to write words that any other member of a worldwide public might see. The fraction of written words in the daily flood is the highest since the invention of written languages. Few moderators exist to police these words. Style guides and their tyranny still exist and still apply to certain writers on certain sites. Other transmitters, from message boards to social media to text messages, allow users to be free to write in any mode that pleases them. > > I get your point, @Exapno_Mapcase , and I don’t entirely disagree, particularly on the important distinction between spoken and written language. But I do feel obliged to do a bit of devil’s advocate work here. > > If the Great Democratization of the written word enabled by the internet now gives writers the freedom to write in any way they please, in a manner solely intended to please themselves, it should surely also give their luckless beleagered readers the freedom to criticize their writing when it’s atrociously bad. To say that the internet abounds in terrible writing is rather an understatement; atrociously bad writing is practically the currency of social media and the lesser blogs. Writing that ranges from hard to read to entirely incomprehensible, verging on functional illiteracy, is not something that should be celebrated as liberation from the “tyranny” of the style manual. > > Which is why there are hundreds of sites on the web, many of them associated with major reference works like dictionaries, that offer writing tips and grammar instruction. There is no more reason to suppose that any random writer will statistically be any better at his craft than any random participant in any other endeavour requiring some level of skill, especially if they haven’t been adequately trained. In fact, probably less so, because artists like musicians, singers, and painters generally go into their field after they’ve already demonstrated some intrinsic capacity for it, whereas everybody tries to write, even those who think that “their”, “there”, and “they’re” are completely interchangeable. I have a delightful internal picture of the chaos we’d see if someone were to subscribe to Grammarly and apply it to the old Time Cube site. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2024, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/146 "2024-05-30T12:21:53Z")
I agree with wolfpup AND Exapno. The way we try (not always successfully, I’m sorry to say) to square this circle when teaching undergraduates at my workplace, is to distinguish between formal and informal writing, and to offer some feedback on both modes. Obviously, the feedback and expectations are distinct — but there is some overlap, mainly the goal of clarity (which includes appropriate length). The explosion of informal writing since the advent of texting and such is a good thing overall, but more students than before now struggle to keep informal styles out of formal contexts. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2024, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/147 "2024-05-30T18:19:18Z")
Yes, what is needed is a written variant of code switching. People disagree about the pros and cons of code switching, and it must be learned. To prove that it’s not natural listen to any Boomer trying to speak Teen. > **[The Digital Lives of Teens: Code Switching](https://www.edutopia.org/blog/digital-teens-code-switching-matt-levinson)** > > Principal, author and blogger Matt Levinson looks at the linguistic phenomenon of code switching and how to help teens find the balance between digital communications and appropriate classroom interactions. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2024, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/148 "2024-05-30T18:21:14Z")
> [@JKellyMap](#): > > I agree with wolfpup AND Exapno. The way we try (not always successfully, I’m sorry to say) to square this circle when teaching undergraduates at my workplace, is to distinguish between formal and informal writing, and to offer some feedback on both modes. Heh–that’s basically what I do, too, except with fourth graders. Here’s my introductory lesson on grammar, which I follow up with lessons on subjects, predicates, parts of speech, and so on. > **[Telepathy](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1GcObopdKhybp-bSqX4YAnqlV3YNvcpx357eZ3amzUbo/edit?usp=sharing)** > > Telepathy And how to use it ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2024, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/149 "2024-05-30T18:21:40Z")
Thanks for that. ---
**Author:** ![Gatopescado](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gatopescado/32/5711_2.png) [@Gatopescado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gatopescado)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2024, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/150 "2024-06-02T21:51:15Z")
[You Provincial Putz!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boDew2BaR1w) ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2024, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/151 "2024-06-02T22:03:05Z")
In Greece there was a diglossia between “katharevousa” and Demotic Greek, which was resolved (in some sense) by making Demotic the official language. However, one result is that now _Demotic_ has become standardized, so that it can be taught in schools, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Mama\_Zappa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/71e660/32.png) [@Mama\_Zappa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mama_Zappa)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2024, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/152 "2024-06-07T22:15:17Z")
> [@SlipperyPete](#): > > These are the two that drive me crazy, and they seem to be quite common in rural areas: > > “That car needs fixed.” “The lawn needs mowed.” TO BE, people. It “needs TO BE”! Or alternatively, it “needs [verb-]ing.” It is (or at least was, when I grew up) a Pennsylvania-ism. My husband got annoyed when I phrased something like that. It was years before he heard another person use that phrasing, and I made a big deal out of pointing it out to him. ---
**Author:** ![needscoffee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/needscoffee/32/1076_2.png) [@needscoffee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/needscoffee)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2024, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/153 "2024-06-08T04:50:59Z")
> [@Mama\_Zappa](#): > > It is (or at least was, when I grew up) a Pennsylvania-ism. I remember this from an episode of Thirty-Something. “She just wanted walked home.” it was remarked that it was a regionalism, iirc. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2024, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/154 "2024-06-17T17:16:06Z")
“Let’s flush out those details in another meeting.” No. The details are currently a skeleton that need flesh. That’s why we flesh them out. We don’t flush them out, because then they’d go down the drainpipe and we’d lose them forever. ---
**Author:** ![CairoCarol](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cairocarol/32/3825_2.png) [@CairoCarol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CairoCarol)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2024, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/155 "2024-06-17T17:23:17Z")
Maybe the details are cowering in a closet somewhere, hoping to escape unseen. ETA: is “flush” acceptable? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2024, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/156 "2024-06-17T17:29:53Z")
Personally, I don’t like how “capital” means both wealth and also the administrative city of a nation. I’d prefer that “capitol” refer to both the administrative building and the city, while “capital” mean purely a monetary term. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2024, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/157 "2024-06-17T17:31:57Z")
Also: we “eke out gains”, we do not “eek them out”, we are not scaring the gains into existence. ---
**Author:** ![teelabrown](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/teelabrown/32/8412_2.png) [@teelabrown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/teelabrown)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2024, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/158 "2024-06-17T17:36:36Z")
And: something that’s zany is “wacky”. “Whacky” would describe someone who likes to whack things. ---
**Author:** ![CairoCarol](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cairocarol/32/3825_2.png) [@CairoCarol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CairoCarol)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2024, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/159 "2024-06-17T17:43:20Z")
Just to nitpick @HMS_Irruncible , this thread is not about mistakes in semantics and grammar. It’s about constructions that have become acceptable that you wish were not. Along those lines, I had a very old-school friend who could not tolerate split infinitives. No amount of explaining how that was a ridiculous rule made up by some cranky guy who believed that since it is impossible to split an infinitive in Latin, English should institute a rule against such splits, mattered to him. He said, “I know it should be okay to split infinitives, but I can’t stand the way it sounds.” I disagree with him on that particular issue, but there are constructions/usages that are becoming acceptable that I wish would still be considered wrong. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2024, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984/160 "2024-06-17T17:57:09Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > while “capital” mean purely a monetary term. What about capital letters? Or capital punishment? Or the capital of a column? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acceptable-english-grammar-semantics-that-you-hate/1001984.md?page=9)