# Common English phrases that, when you really think about it, don't make sense **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [October 28, 2011, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080 "2011-10-28T15:35:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Chessic\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Chessic\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chessic_Sense)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/61 "2011-10-31T16:48:34Z")
> [@Smeghead](#): > > You can literally “turn out” your pockets to reveal what’s in them. Hence, “turn out” means to reveal the ending. But the phrase has nothing to do with pockets, except by coincidence. > [@SeldomSeen](#): > > Seldom’s pet peeve…“_It’ll get worse before it gets better_” Say what?? how do you know? > [@CitizenPained](#): > > I also hate the word ‘extraordinary’. It makes it sound like something is extra-ordinary. You know. Not just plain, but REALLY plain. > [@Senegoid](#): > > My peeve is writers (this is seen often in news articles, etc.) using either the word **stanch** or **staunch** where the other should be, as if those words are interchangeable. When did they change the thread title to “Common English phrases that you hate”? > [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](#): > > _“Have your cake and eat it too.”_ > > What!? \*Of course \*if you (first) have some cake, you can then (second) eat it too. Nothing very interesting about that. It’s “have your cake **AND** eat it, too.” It’s not “have your cake **THEN** eat it, too.” At any point in time, you can either eat it or have (keep) it, but not both. > [@DMark](#): > > When people say something is “very unique”. > Uh, isn’t unique different than anything else by definition - how can it be _more_ unique by adding the word “very” to it? Because things have more than one attribute. If I have a drawer full of white tee shirts, a red tee, and a blue polo, the polo is more unique than the red tee. It’s unique in color _and_ type. If you insist that truly unique things are unique in every attribute, then everything in the universe is unique once one invokes the Pauli Exclusion Principle. > [@Nava](#): > > Some people get blessed with babies…they took some heavy-duty shaking. “…and that’s why your Uncle Ronnie likes to always wear the bunny costume.” ---
**Author:** ![Gagundathar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a183cd/32.png) [@Gagundathar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gagundathar)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/62 "2011-10-31T17:16:05Z")
> [@Senegoid](#): > > Okay, here’s my case: Not a phrase, but just a word: > > My peeve is writers (this is seen often in news articles, etc.) using either the word **stanch** or **staunch** where the other should be, as if those words are interchangeable. > > (Yes, I’ve seen it mentioned in some descriptivist fictionaries that one or both of these words can be used with both meanings. But that merely _describes_ the way people are mangling the usage. That doesn’t convince me of anything useful.) > > I also wonder about the word disgruntled. What does it mean to be gruntled? Is gruntle also a verb? Apparently, the folklorist W. P. Webb coined the word ‘gruntle’ as a backformation from ‘disgruntle’ in 1926. His definition was ‘to put in a good humor’, as in “were gruntled with a good meal and good conversation.” ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/63 "2011-10-31T22:19:00Z")
Thanks to this thread while reading last night I came across a passage where someone was referred to as having been “beat up” and found myself wondering at the logic of the phrase. “Beat down”, yeah; but how do you beat someone up? ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2011, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/64 "2011-11-01T00:10:09Z")
Exactly what does “not for nuthin” mean? It makes no sense to me. ---
**Author:** ![RadicalPi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/radicalpi/32/9806_2.png) [@RadicalPi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RadicalPi)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2011, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/65 "2011-11-01T00:11:07Z")
There are a number of phrases in English where the negation gets screwed up. “I could care less.” This is of course the most common, and the one that tends to get people’s blood boiling. But there are some others, such as: “That’ll teach you to stay out late.” What is meant, of course, is that that (whatever it is) will teach you to _not_ stay out late. “The Judge Institute is a building that no-one in Cambridge can fail to ignore.” And other phrases with “fail to ‘blank.’” “It’s impossible to underestimate the value of early diagnosis of breast cancer.” Underestimate should be overestimate. This web site ([Language Log: Why are negations so easy to fail to miss?](http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000500.html)) is where I got these examples, and the reason for them (to spoil the surprise) is that _less_, _fail_, and so on aren’t grammatically negative, but in a certain sense seem negative. ---
**Author:** ![Alice\_The\_Goon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Alice\_The\_Goon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alice_The_Goon)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2011, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/66 "2011-11-01T00:12:27Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Thanks to this thread while reading last night I came across a passage where someone was referred to as having been “beat up” and found myself wondering at the logic of the phrase. “Beat down”, yeah; but how do you beat someone up? Well, there’s also fuck you up mess you up call you up sex you up look you up trip you up etc so I can see how you would beat someone up. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2011, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/67 "2011-11-01T00:24:34Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Thanks to this thread while reading last night I came across a passage where someone was referred to as having been “beat up” and found myself wondering at the logic of the phrase. “Beat down”, yeah; but how do you beat someone up? Up shows UP like that a lot…[UP is one of those “superwords”](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/up) that fills in all over the language. [ul] [li]beat up[/li][li]show up - arrive[/li][li]show up - best someone[/li][li]turn up[/li][li]thought up[/li][li]mess up[/li][li]fuck up[/li][li]act up[/li][li]saddle up[/li][li]screw up[/li][li]walk up (you may actually walk down a hill to walk up to someone!)[/li][li]grind up[/li][li]chop, hack, slice up[/li][li]stir up[/li][/ul] ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2011, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/68 "2011-11-01T00:28:59Z")
Ah! I see someone else got uppity with up… > [@ralph124c](#): > > Exactly what does “not for nuthin” mean? > It makes no sense to me. That actually does make sense. It means “not without a reason” which is the same as “for no reason” or, a little sloppily but accurately “not for nothing” ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2011, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/69 "2011-11-01T00:32:20Z")
There’s another meaning to the phrase “turned out” – turned into a prostitute or whore. One of my favorites – “Beggars can’t be choosers” – Really? I mean, it may not be a good idea for them, but they certainly can choose. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2011, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/70 "2011-11-01T01:31:10Z")
> [@Sunspace](#): > > I find that “I could care less… but I don’t.” can be quite effective. That makes even less sense. So you do actually care? ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2011, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/71 "2011-11-01T12:04:23Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > That makes even less sense. So you do actually care? Yeah, I was reading it and thinking “have I missed something here?” It basically reads like “it is theoretically possible that I could care less about \ than I do right now, but I don’t”. So basically, you are not saying that you care the least you possibly can. Which is a crappy insult. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2011, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/72 "2011-11-01T23:27:21Z")
I think it’s saying I could care less about this but the amount I do care is so little I can’t be bothered to care that infinitesimal extra amount. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/73 "2011-11-02T02:45:53Z")
I was just thinking that the phrase “beneath contempt” doesn’t make much sense. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/74 "2011-11-02T03:08:05Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > I was just thinking that the phrase “beneath contempt” doesn’t make much sense. Sure it does. It’s hyperbole. It’s like telling someone he’s lower than a snake’s belly in quicksand. He’s so contemptible he’s simply not worth the effort. ---
**Author:** ![Yumblie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/76d3ee/32.png) [@Yumblie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yumblie)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/75 "2011-11-02T05:51:36Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Up shows UP like that a lot…[UP is one of those “superwords”](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/up) that fills in all over the language. > > [ul] > [li]beat up[/li][li]show up - arrive[/li][li]show up - best someone[/li][li]turn up[/li][li]thought up[/li][li]mess up[/li][li]fuck up[/li][li]act up[/li][li]saddle up[/li][li]screw up[/li][li]walk up (you may actually walk down a hill to walk up to someone!)[/li][li]grind up[/li][li]chop, hack, slice up[/li][li]stir up[/li][/ul] When asked if I’m available or willing to do something, I can say I’m up for it or down for it and they both mean the same thing. Either way, what does my desire to take part in activity have to do with my direction? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/76 "2011-11-02T08:05:43Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > I think it’s saying I could care less about this but the amount I do care is so little I can’t be bothered to care that infinitesimal extra amount. But it _means_: _The amount that I care is greater than the minimum possible level of caring._ Or, in other words, adding ‘But I don’t’ to ‘I _could_ care less’ doesn’t redeem the phrase, it just reinforces the nonsensicality. ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/77 "2011-11-02T10:03:41Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > I think it’s saying I could care less about this but the amount I do care is so little I can’t be bothered to care that infinitesimal extra amount. Yeah, when the insult has two such completely different - and possibly valid - interpretations then frankly it has failed as an insult. I do, however, see your interpretation as an excuse given to try and validate what was essentially a screw up. Some people started saying it wrong and came up with a half-arsed interpretation as a validation rather than holding up their hands and saying “we screwed up”. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/78 "2011-11-02T11:27:54Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > It’s “have your cake **AND** eat it, too.” It’s not “have your cake **THEN** eat it, too.” At any point in time, you can either eat it or have (keep) it, but not both. I’ve noticed there’s a helpful tip right in the middle of this thread’s title: “Common English phrases that, when _ **you really think about it,** _ don’t make sense.” Anyone can have their cake and eat it too, so that’s a rather pointless thing to say. As an erstwhile pithy saying, it certainly lacks pith. When you put it the other way around however, it has meaning. People have just screwed it up so much over time that the incorrect version has become normal-- much like the “I could care less” silliness. Most folks just don’t think about what they say. Dopers usually do. > [@](#): > > it is first written down in John Heywood’s A Dialogue Conteynyng Prouerbes and Epigrammes of 1562: “Wolde ye bothe eate your cake, and haue your cake?”. John Keats quoted it as eat your cake and have it at the beginning of his poem On Fame in 1816; Franklin D Roosevelt borrowed it in that form for his State of the Union Address in 1940; a search of nineteenth-century literature shows it to be about twice as common as the other. from [here](http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-hav2.htm). And… > [@](#): > > Most people reverse this saying when using it. “You can’t have your cake and eat it too.” But this is false. The only way anyone can eat their cake is by having it, and so everybody who eats cake has their cake and eats it to. The way you phrased it, is of course, correct. The false assertion does not fit any situation. Your assertion fits those situations where people regret their decisions and actions and pine for a return to the way things were. from [here](http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_this_correct_%27You_can%27t_eat_your_cake_and_have_it_too%27) [Here’s](http://www.maximumawesome.com/reference/g-eatcake.htm) another cite–it’s a guy who’s kinda cranky about people not understanding why this phrase in nonsensical: > [@](#): > > People like to misspeak it as, “You can’t have your cake and eat it too.” No? Here’s my cake. I have it. Now I’m eating it. Moron. You can’t eat your cake and have it too, because once you eat it, you no longer have it. The expression is used as another way of saying, “You can’t have it both ways.” How ironic, then, that most people think they can word the expression either way without changing the meaning. Argh, they should be shot. Indeed, you might cleverly respond to such a dope, “Nay, my good man. You can’t eat your cake and have it too.” It’ll drive them batty. Why does this bother me so much? It bothers Harlan Ellison a lot Since that guy mentions Ellison, let’s have a look at Harlan’s [ridicule of the knuckle-draggers](http://harlanellison.com/buzz/bw139h.htm): > [@](#): > > It is wrong to say, “Have your cake and eat it too”. Oh, that’s real easy. Here is my cake. I have it. I have eaten it too. What you can not do is eat your cake and have it too. Would you get it right? Would you get it right? And hey, presto! Here’s good ol’ Wikipedia: > [@](#): > > Paul Brians, Professor of English at Washington State University, points out that perhaps a more logical or easier to understand version of this saying is, “You can’t eat your cake and have it too.” Professor Brians writes that a common source of confusion about this idiom stems from the verb to have which in this case indicates that once eaten, keeping possession of the cake is no longer possible, seeing that it is in your stomach (and no longer exists as a cake).[2] Alternatively, the two verbs can be understood to represent a sequence of actions, so one can indeed “have” one’s cake and then “eat” it. Consequently, the literal meaning of the reversed idiom doesn’t match the metaphorical meaning. ---
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/79 "2011-11-02T12:40:18Z")
To the truly insightful, one will understand the claim that it is only possible to truly have one’s cake once it has been eaten. For when cake has been consumed, it has become a part of you, you have it inside you, and it would be very difficult to remove. Before it is eaten, having the cake is merely an illusion or a social agreement. Therefore, the proper expression should be “You can only have your cake if you eat it too.” ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080/80 "2011-11-02T13:20:13Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > That’s some progress aong the path, definitely, but why out? Are you “in” as your progress through the path?: Think of a hedge maze… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/common-english-phrases-that-when-you-really-think-about-it-dont-make-sense/601080.md?page=5)