Every absolute value day, eh? 
He got it from Mrs. Brown’s lovely daughter.
But, I’m glad you brought this up. When somebody uses “noone” in a post on this board I’m actually distracted by the thought of Peter Noone as the subject matter of the sentence.
I think people get “everyday/every day” mixed up with compound words like “everyone” and “everything.”
This thread is going faster than a roller-coaster!
OP be educatin dem fools all day errday.
[bolding added]
Monty. Monty!
Also: Elbows, don’t you even “W” me. You know you messed up, now 'fess up. :^)
Grin! Last time I felt for someone, I got slapped across the face.
Another pet grammar peeve for me is “Should have went”. Yes, I am treated to that one at least once every day. The sad thing id I get that “treat” occasionally from English teachers. :eek:
Since you asked. . .
The original word was ‘inflammable,’ which was derived from ‘inflame,’ meaning ‘to set on fire.’ ‘Inflammable’ means ‘able to be set on fire.’ ‘Flammable’ is a later usage, supposedly invented because ‘inflammable’ sounds like it means the opposite of what it actually means. That’s how ‘flammable’ became the everyday usage.
That should read: “The sad thing is”.
I fully support the OP’s rant. Adding to the aggravation is that you’re likely to see this writ large, on huge banners in the windows of grocery stores (“We offer big savings everyday”) or on marquees and billboards.
Since related rants have been piling up in this thread, I’m surprised I’m the first to mention the increasing numbers of folk who believe plurals are formed with an apostrophe-s.
For example, a sign at a car repair shop in my neighborhood informs us: Saturday Hour’s, 9:00-5:00.
My college cafeteria reused food signs at their stations so every time it was mexican night, I saw a sign that said:
TACOS
QUESADILLAS
BURRITO’S
I never did figure out why someone decided burritos needed an apostrophe and as far as I know, they’re still using that sign.
Yeah, they should of wrote it different.
A store near my house has a sign that advertises:
CUSHION’S
DRAPE’S
ALTERATION’S
It looks to me like the dictionary knew what word you meant, and took you to that entry. Merriam Webster does the same thing. Even the address bar shows:
But they all go to the same entry where only “no one” is used in the various definitions and examples.
Usually, when you’ve searched for an alternate spelling of a word, the entry will use the nonstandard symbol (÷) or plainly states that it’s an alternate spelling (cf: womyn).
Every one of us thinks that everyone else is using all these words wrong.
But what do I know? I’m just Everyman, trying to make his way in the workaday world.
IMHO that’s different. It’s not accidental bad English, but deliberate creative English. Shakespeare got away with a hell of a lot more than “basementy”.
I’ve become so used to that I barely even notice it any more. I think a lot of people have got the impression that you just dump an apostrophe in whenever two letters look unusual together. What’s (mildly) irritating me nowadays is insertion of apostrophes into unusual (or made up) verbs. Using your burrito example, someone might say, informally, “burrito me”. They might then, strangely, describe themselves as “burrito’d”.
That’s what’s known as the greengrocer’s apostrophe. If they had simply written burritoed or burritod, there’s a possibility for ambiguity where a reader believes this is an entirely new word in its own right, while burrito’d calls attention to the fact that it is a clitic and in this instance, should be parsed as the past participle of the verb to burrito.
edit:
In fact, in the opening monologue to Henry V, Shakespeare refers to “the vasty fields of france”. The commercial is not wrong or uneducated! It’s a subtle homage to one of English’s greatest wordsmiths!
You people are so damn anal.
None of these mistakes effect me.
Appreciate the - hmm - humor.
Perhaps not anal.
Perhaps observant, rather.
Perhaps wondering if these very slightly semi-illiterate/slightly lazy writings are indicative of qualities about the writer themself.
Perhaps.
(I feel compelled to add the following from oxforddictionaries.com:
"In recent years, people have started to use themself to correspond to this singular use of they and them: it’s seen as the logical singular form of themselves. For example:
This is the first step in helping someone to help themself.
This form is not yet accepted by everyone, though, and you should avoid using it in formal written contexts.")
Talk about anal!