“hammydowns” … oy.
Brings to mind a few others I’ve seen in print, though, particularly on eBay: chester drawers, sequence (as in “it has beads and sequence sewn onto it so it sparkles”), collectable, and “Paypal excepted.”
And one that made it into a craft magazine: “Using variegated yarn gives a more suddle effect.” Especially notable because “variegated” was spelled correctly.
Craigslist is a “treasure” trove for this sort of thing.
Elsewhere I mentioned that during my recent apartment hunting a search turned up no fewer than twenty advertisements for “specious” apartments in a one-month period. (Thanks for the warning!)
Recently I have noticed that “lugsurious” on the increase.
Yesterday there was an ad for a “lugsurious upscale quality suite” near “Coyoty Creek Elementery, Coyoty Creek High School, and Coyoty Creek Golf Course.” Awesome.
It seems to be moving toward being considered acceptable speech, but it bugs the heck out of me when people say, “… should have went…” instead of the correct “… should have gone…” Very common to hear it from deejays and sports commentators.
My Mom says “heighth” instead of “height.” :mad:
And I also see a fair amount of posts – not here, mind you! – where people place apostrophes before the “s” when writing plural words (e.g. “At the zoo we saw the giraffe’s”). 
Barbeque. Christ on a cracker, but whenever I see it, even from old, dear friends, I long for a device that allows you to stab another’s eyes out over the internet. The “Q” part emerged from the sound made by the final syllable, and don’t you try to tell me otherwise.
BAR BE EFFING CUE
Then there is laid. “I laid down on the grass.” Here my moue of distaste corresponds to how unlikely the communicator is to make you want to think of him/her in even the same room as an oocyte.
Worthy of mild amusement is “ac meals” and “pc meals,” ante and post cibum (“we’re gonna get us some cibum and bits!”), before and after meals meals. Tsk.
Actually, the correct spelling of that word has always bugged me. Aren’t we saying that it’s something you are *able * to collect?
Collectible…WTH?
I’ve always wondered if it was some kind of state law here that roadside boiled peanut stands must misspell either boiled or peanut. (Also, they must be sloppily done in either green or red paint). The other day I saw a sign advertising “Boiled Peanut’s”. Ah, so close!
Oh and another one that drives me nuts – people saying AT at the end of a sentence. “This is where it’s AT”, instead of “This is where it is”. “Where are you AT?” instead of “Where are you?”
Me find this error make me less mad than “Bonuses were provided to Mongo and I for September’s successes”. And when me hear “Myself and Mongo have provided charts for your convenience”, me want to smash.
One that annoys me way out of proportion to the probable stupidity involved (it can be a typo rather than a grammatical error) is “and” where “an” belongs.
Everyone should bring and index card when you come to class.
Those seeking reimbursal for travel expenses must submit and itemized list of expenditures by end of month.
I just can’t read those sentences on first attempt. My mind tries its damndest to parse the conjunction and ends up in the incomplete-sentence desert and I have to start over.
Irregardless…Heard a CNN announcer use it yesterday.
Edit: I’m an idiot
My idiot manager likes to say “Pacific” when she means “specific” I fantasize about pounding her head against the wall until she learns the difference.
ETA: I wanted to smack my son’s teacher last night (3rd grade) when she explained that “there is contact information for myself on the paper I gave you.” Seriously, people, use of the reflexive just makes you look as stupid as you are.
I should point out how proudly she explained to us all that she “has a Master’s in reading.” Apparently reading that doesn’t involve the English language or the use of said language.
Hmm, yes, it’s as if there were only twenty-two letters of the alphabet.
Now get off my lawn.
“the reason is because…” (shudder)
“center around” instead of “center on”
Are you saying that linguists concern themselves with what is “right” and “wrong” grammatically? Have linguists said that the majority rules and that whatever is currently in vogue is just fine?
Do you honestly think that most of these linguists (the movers and the shakers) would use alright in an academic paper as a substitute for all right?
Why do you refer to teachers as “self-appointed”? This comment – coupled with SmartAleq’s assumption that the classroom teacher was glad to see him go because he had corrected her error – is really hostile. How did you know the difference in the two words? (Thank a teacher.)
Depending on context I think “centered around” could be correct.
Eeeeeewwwww! Don’t even think it, Opal! It blurs time and space.
As I’ve learned here, “irregardless”, no matter how silly-looking (and sounding), is actually a sort of acceptable form. Webster’s and American Heritage both accept it.
It’s worth noting, I suppose, that the ultimate authority - the good old OED - lists is as “informal”.
As do I. “Centred/centered on” would be correct if you’re talking about a physical location or something else that would be a discrete fixed spot - a number, for example.
If you’re using it to describe an idea or somesuch, though, “centered around” makes perfect sense; ie. “The book is centered around the concept of divinity.”
Since divinity is not an easily identifiable point, you couldn’t say something was centered on it, really.
Yes, but -able and -ible are commonly interchangeable suffixes and mean the same thing. “Comestible”, “edible”, “possible”, “eligible”, “dirigible” and others all use “-ible” in the same sense.
My personal gripe is a usage error rather than a spelling error: “within” as an inclusive term. It isn’t. Sorry.
If you have $5, and your goal is to have $6, you are not “within a dollar of your goal.” You are a dollar from your goal. You are within $1.01 of your goal.
Sports announcers do this all the time. The Bulls are down by six points. “The Bulls are within six with a minute to go!” No, you fucking idiot, they aren’t, unless they scored half a point somehow and the scoreboard doesn’t display fractions or decimals.
I once read a long and rambling post but perked up when the poster used the term, “low on a bee-hole.”
Several re-readings and actually pronouncing the phrase made it clear:
He meant “lo and behold”.
Within
Cambridge: inside or not beyond an area or period of time
Chambers: not outside the limits of something
Collins: not beyond
M-W: not beyond the quantity, degree, or limitations of
Which dictionary are you using?
Yes, they are. They’re within six points of tying the game, and sending it into overtime, which is their primary goal at this point. They’d like to win outright of course, but they will gladly settle for scoring six more points to their opponents’ 0 and tying the game.