# Battles you know are lost but still won't stop fighting **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [March 15, 2006, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404 "2006-03-15T02:13:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![dnooman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/839c29/32.png) [@dnooman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dnooman)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2006, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/141 "2006-03-18T22:15:00Z")
A friend of mine gets his panties in a twist every time someone says that they’re nauseous. He says “No, you’re nauseated. If you were nauseous you’d be causing nausea”. Dictionaries agree that nauseous can also mean “affected by nausea” but my friend doesn’t care. I want to bitch slap people that leave out the words to be. “The lawn needs mowed and your house needs painted”. Gah! ---
**Author:** ![Kyla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/eada6e/32.png) [@Kyla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyla)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/142 "2006-03-19T00:16:50Z")
> [@robardin](#): > > D’oh! D’oh! :smack: You got the name of the play wrong, too. It’s _Waiting **for** Godot_. Mine: literally = ! figuratively. God, this makes me cringe. The Muslim holy book is the _Qur’an_. If you can’t figure out where the apostrophe goes, just spell it _Koran_, okay? This drives me crazy, and I see it wrong in books, magazines, and message board posts all the freaking time. The apostrophe represents a glottal stop and is an actual letter in Arabic. You can’t put it anywhere you like! ---
**Author:** ![Paintcharge](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/paintcharge/32/7946_2.png) [@Paintcharge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paintcharge)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/143 "2006-03-19T20:54:31Z")
The one that gets to me is “I’m going to try \*\*and \*\*do X.” No you’re going to try **to** do X. Perhaps it is said in an effort to be optimistic. I’m not sure. This is one I hear on TV news, read in papers etc. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/144 "2006-03-20T03:48:39Z")
> [@Martin Sable](#): > > Two years ago, 90 percent of the English-speaking world suddenly started spelling “lose” and “losing” as “loose” and “loosing.” I’m still trying to figure out how and why that happened. It’s driving me crazy. Unfortunately, the trend has been around longer than that–I saw “loose” used for “lose” at an REI in Minnesota around 1993, I believe. > [@Kyla](#): > > You got the name of the play wrong, too. It’s Waiting for Godot. That was intentional, and was supposed to emphasize the difference between “waiting for” and “waiting on”. > [@Kyla](#): > > literally = ! figuratively. God, this makes me cringe. This one will probably send me on a killing spree someday. The next person who tells me they literally jumped through the roof will find themselves literally thrown through the roof. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/145 "2006-03-20T05:31:24Z")
Quoth **OtakuLoki** > [@](#): > > This is particularly annoying when people talk about things in microgravity environments. Right there is one that annoys me. You can argue that the ISS and the things in it are in .8 gravities, that being the strength of the Earth’s gravity at that height. I’m fine with that. Or you can take the relativistic view that the station, being in freefall, is in zero gravity. But there’s no meaningful sense in which the station is in a little bit of gravity. “Microgravity” comes from people who have the impression that “zero gravity” is wrong (it isn’t, relativistically speaking), but don’t know why, so they coin a term meaning “almost but not quite zero gravity”. The common term “zero gravity” perhaps does not fully represent the subtleties of the situation, but it’s far more correct than “microgravity”. And “freefall” does fully represent the subtleties of the situation, though I understand entirely why that one won’t catch on in the public mind (and am not bothered by that). Use either one of those, just not “microgravity”. And don’t get me started on “escape velocity” instead of “escape speed”. ---
**Author:** ![dbuzman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de0a6/32.png) [@dbuzman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dbuzman)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 8:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/146 "2006-03-20T08:15:06Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > I think I hear a difference in meaning between “you have a friend” and “you’ve got a friend,” but I can’t even figure out what it is. The addition of the “got” seems to add more emphasis, but I don’t know why. Maybe it’s just a more emphatic sounding word? Maybe the writers of the phrase thought “you have a friend in Pennsylvania” could be taken as you have a friend who lives in Pa. and you’ve got etc. as Pa. itself is your friend. ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/147 "2006-03-20T17:03:06Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > So you know that _secretly_, deep down, they’re violating the grammatical rules in their hearts? > > :: sigh :: > > “I could care less” is an idiom, a set phrase. People recite it - as with all idioms - as a single unit, known linguistically as a “lexeme”. There’s no point in criticizing the use of idioms - they’re part of how language works. If you’d ever bothered to listen carefully, you’d notice that the two phrase “I could care less” and “I couldn’t care less” have _vastly_ different intonational patterns, which suggests that they probably _do_ have some story behind them. Stephen Pinker used the intonational patterns to argue that the former is sarcastic, though I’m not positive I agree with him. Either way, you’re vastly oversimplifying something, apparently just so you can have some reason to look down on the way other people talk. Yes, you have stated my point here exactly. It has become an idiom. It is a single unit that means, “I do not care about that.” It is my contention that unless people know that the literal meaning of what they are saying is, “It is possible for me to care less about that thing than I currently do, thereby insinuating that I care about it somewhat,” and with that knowledge intend for it to be understood to mean the opposite, then they are not being sarcastic. They are just using an idiom without thinking about it. This idea is supported by my experience that not one person I have ever spoken to about this used the phrase in a sarcastic manner. They have either never thought about it (the vast majority) or realized it did not make any sense but continued to use it out of habit. > [@](#): > > Yeah, I made a typo. I saw it, but we can’t edit our posts. So sorry. By your tone it seems you think I was making fun of you. OK, I guess I was a bit. It was not mean spirited though. There was just a certain beauty in following the phrase, “…the most misused grammatical term in existence,” with a common word substitution error. When discussing grammar we open ourselves up to nitpicking, as I am sure I will be regretting once I notice the grammatical errors in his post that are escaping me at the moment. ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/148 "2006-03-20T17:19:02Z")
> [@flight](#): > > When discussing grammar we open ourselves up to nitpicking, as I am sure I will be regretting once I notice the grammatical errors in **his** post that are escaping me at the moment. Which should, of course, be THIS post. Damn, in the actual sentence I predicted it. ---
**Author:** ![Mayo\_Speaks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c57346/32.png) [@Mayo\_Speaks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mayo_Speaks)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/149 "2006-03-20T17:27:08Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > Effect (noooooooun) vs affect (veeeeeeerb). > > Yes, I do work with IT guys and programmers a lot. A follow-up: The uninformed grammar Nazis who correct me when I use **effect** as a verb. (Note: I’m not talking about Nava here, s/he just reminded me.) I can **effect** changes, dadgummit! And more generally, when the would be grammarians “correct” me for any legitimate usage. If you’re going to be annoying, be in the right And I’m sure that I made some grammatical mistakes in this post. But I’m fine with that. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/150 "2006-03-20T19:24:57Z")
Even with the many, many grammar rants I’ve read here, I’ve never seen anyone decry the misuse of the phrase “how dare”. As in _How dare him!_ or _How dare her!_. Just because the pronoun comes after the verb doesn’t make it automatically an object. Yes I know it’s an archaic idiom, because modern English uses the auxiliary in forming a question, and I know that English is a subject-verb-object language, and I further know that I’m being prescriptivist. But the usages above just sound semi-literate to me. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/151 "2006-03-20T19:47:54Z")
> [@Spectre of Pithecanthropus](#): > > Even with the many, many grammar rants I’ve read here, I’ve never seen anyone decry the misuse of the phrase “how dare”. As in > > _How dare him!_ or _How dare her!_. > > Just because the pronoun comes after the verb doesn’t make it automatically an object. Yes I know it’s an archaic idiom, because modern English uses the auxiliary in forming a question, and I know that English is a subject-verb-object language, and I further know that I’m being prescriptivist. > > But the usages above just sound semi-literate to me. I’ve never once in my life heard that. It sounds absolutely bizarre to me. ---
**Author:** ![kelly5078](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/6f9a4e/32.png) [@kelly5078](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kelly5078)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/152 "2006-03-20T21:34:52Z")
> [@gigi](#): > > Well, it is listed as a verb in the dictionary, as is “suicide”!! > [@excalibre](#): > > Why do you think “orgasm” isn’t a verb? Why shouldn’t people use it that way? What’s wrong with doing so? Okay, so I see that the AHD has decided to accept “orgasm” as a verb. The whores. Fortunately, Webster’s Online doesn’t go down that road. Unless I’m greatly mistaken, orgasm was always a noun until Shere Hite, in “The Hite Report,” decided to use it as a verb. I’m an old fashioned boy, and it drives me nuts. But go ahead and verb things if it makes you happy. ---
**Author:** ![Lazlo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lazlo/32/9678_2.png) [@Lazlo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lazlo)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2006, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/153 "2006-03-21T06:29:32Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > 😕 But just about every specific term for a large number of things can be used that way. “Hundreds” and “thousands” are particularly common. In fact, you can’t use them as anything _but_ nouns - you can’t say, for instance “I have thousand dollars” - you _have_ to use the article, because “thousand” is _not_ an adjective, the way smaller numbers are. I simply don’t understand what you’re getting at at all. Sorry for not getting back to this earlier. I haven’t read the entire thread yet, so I don’t know if anyone else has addressed this. Anyhow, from [dictionary.com](http://dictionary.com): > [@](#): > > **myr-i-ad** > _adj._ > > 1. Constituting a very large, indefinite number; innumerable: \*the myriad fish in the ocean. \* > 2. Composed of numerous diverse elements or facets: \*the myriad life of the metropolis. \* > \*n. \* > 3. A vast number: the myriads of bees in the hive. > 4. Archaic. Ten thousand. > > Usage Note: Throughout most of its history in English myriad was used as a noun, as in a myriad of men. In the 19th century it began to be used in poetry as an adjective, as in myriad men. My whole life I’ve been taught that the adjective form is “proper.” However, after reading the [dictionary.com](http://dictionary.com) usage note, I see that i’m the idjit here. 😛 Has anyone mentioned using apostrophes for plurals? ---
**Author:** ![Colophon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f05b48/32.png) [@Colophon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colophon)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2006, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/154 "2006-03-21T13:28:02Z")
Folks that write “If you think (X), you’ve got another **thing** coming,” instead of the correct version, “another think coming”. I know it’s been debated on here endlessly, I know that those idiomatic vandals [Judas Priest](http://www.fannins-collectables.com/images/j_listing/judas_priest/youve_got_another_thing_coming/cbsa2611_fc-fs.jpg) have muddied the waters with their misspelling, but it’s wrong wrong wrong! It makes no sense, and it destroys the whole point of the phrase. You might think X, but you will very shortly have the error of your views thrust upon you and will instead think Y. And I’ve got a whole bunch of reputable, pre-Judas Priest cites, so if you think I’m gonna back down on this one, you’ve got… ---
**Author:** ![BiblioCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ed8c4c/32.png) [@BiblioCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BiblioCat)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2006, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/155 "2006-03-21T15:12:24Z")
> [@Colophon](#): > > Folks that write “If you think (X), you’ve got another **thing** coming,” instead of the correct version, “another think coming”. I _never, ever, **ever** _ in my life heard " … another **think** coming" till I read one of the endless debates here on this board. I know in one of them, one poster presented pretty sound reasoning why ‘thing’ was just as correct as ‘think.’ It’s always been and always will be “… another **thing** coming” for me. I’m 41, BTW. Mid-Atlantic US. “Another think coming” just sounds soooo wrong to me. ---
**Author:** ![Epimetheus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c4cdca/32.png) [@Epimetheus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Epimetheus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2006, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/156 "2006-03-21T15:43:15Z")
Schizophrenia is NOT multiple personality disorder, and aren’t even remotely related. One is a neurosis, and one is a psychosis. Reflexes and instincts are two distinct things. Cringing from a loud noise is reflexive, not instinctive. I give up on the grammar battles. I realize that meanings change, but I still hold that scientific defintions are static, and that common usage doesn’t change it until the field of science changes it. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2006, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/157 "2006-03-21T18:25:21Z")
> [@kelly5078](#): > > Unless I’m greatly mistaken, orgasm was always a noun until Shere Hite, in “The Hite Report,” decided to use it as a verb. “Verbing weirds language.” - Bill Watterson My personal Betty Noir is criterion vs. criteria. But I understand the inarguability of idiomatic usages, and I let it pass uncommented upon. I’ve seen this sign over a coal-burning fireplace: _If the BMT put : If the B . putting : Don’t put : over a -der. You’d be an \* it._ If the grate be empty, put coal on. If the grate be full stop putting coal on. Don’t put coal on over a high fender. You’d be an ass to risk it. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2006, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/158 "2006-03-22T04:02:06Z")
> [@Colophon](#): > > It makes no sense, and it destroys the whole point of the phrase. Sure it makes sense. I always interpreted “you’ve got another thing coming” as meaning that a **thing** different from the expected **thing** is coming soon. “Another think coming” sounds more like a pun on the original usage to me, and I’ve never heard or seen it like that before. I’m ready to be won over, though: Show me your cites. ---
**Author:** ![Kyla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/eada6e/32.png) [@Kyla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyla)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2006, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/159 "2006-03-22T04:10:47Z")
> [@fetus](#): > > That was intentional, and was supposed to emphasize the difference between “waiting for” and “waiting on”. D’oh. That’ll teach me to be a smartass. Well, no it won’t. But maybe I’ll read the entire post first before correcting it next time. ---
**Author:** ![Colophon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f05b48/32.png) [@Colophon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colophon)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2006, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404/160 "2006-03-22T12:04:11Z")
> [@fetus](#): > > Sure it makes sense. I always interpreted “you’ve got another thing coming” as meaning that a **thing** different from the expected **thing** is coming soon. “Another think coming” sounds more like a pun on the original usage to me, and I’ve never heard or seen it like that before. I’m ready to be won over, though: Show me your cites. It’s supposed to be humorously non-grammatical, same as “sure as eggs is eggs”. It’s a reduplication - if that’s what you **think** , you’ve got _another_ think coming. Otherwise, what is the first thing? There is no thing, so the thing that’s coming won’t be _another_ thing, it’ll just be… a thing. If that’s what you think, you’ve got a thing coming. Well, yeah, okay, but it’s hardly a snappy phrase. As for cites… newest first: Here on my desk is a big copy of Collins English Dictionary (pub 2003). > [@](#): > > **think** NOUN _18_ **you’ve** (\*\*he’s, she’s, \*\*etc.) **got another think coming.** _Slang_ you (etc.) are mistaken and will soon have to alter your opinion. From \*The New Fowler’s Modern English Usage (1996) \*: > [@](#): > > **think** NOUN … not recorded until 1834 … it is commonly used in such sentences as _Have a think about it_ and _You have another think coming_, ‘You are greatly mistaken’.\* The alt.usage.english FAQ ([http://www.alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxyouhav.html](http://www.alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxyouhav.html)) : > [@](#): > > “If you think that, you have another think coming” means “You are > mistaken and will soon have to alter your opinion”. This is now > sometimes heard with “thing” in place of “think”, but “think” is the > older version… The OED gives a citation with “think” > from 1937, and no evidence for “thing”. And here are those cites from the OED: > [@](#): > > **1937** _Amer. Speech XII. 317/1_ Several different statements used for the same idea—that of some one’s making a mistake.\_[e.g.] you have > another think coming. > **1942** _T. Bailey Pink Camellia xxvii. 199_ If you think you can get me out of Gaywood, you have another think coming. > **1979** _Jrnl. R. Soc. Arts CXXVII. 221/2_ Any design consultant who thinks he is going to get British Leyland right by himself on his own has got another think coming. And in the realms of personal anecdote, my grandmother (b. 1919) used the phrase, and told me that she learnt it from _her_ mother as a child in the 1930s. I wonder where her mother first picked it up from? It’s been around for a long long time, and people have obviously misheard it or missed the point of the phrase and so bastardised it into “another thing coming”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battles-you-know-are-lost-but-still-wont-stop-fighting/348404.md?page=9)