# For bitching about language pedantry, other posters' language, and language in general **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 16, 2024, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135 "2024-06-16T22:40:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/281 "2024-06-24T15:52:07Z")
I personally only use the “couldn’t” form and consider the other to be parroted nonsense. I’m just speculating on how parroted nonsense proved popular. I suppose we can say that Gresham’s Law applies to anything taking a moment’s thought. If there’s a way to make it lazier or dumber, the public will seek that out like a bloodhound and cling to it tightly. > **Minion** : But LSLGuy, the peasants are revolting! > **LSLGuy** : I know. [Spoken nasally with a broad “o” while ostentatiously gazing down one’s schnoz at the stinky multitude in the courtyard.] ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/282 "2024-06-24T15:57:26Z")
> [@colinfred](#): > > nonsense parroted by idiots Watch out or @Pleonast will blast you for daring to use a pejorative in the Pit! I just got an earful about it! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/283 "2024-06-24T16:18:29Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > according to Google Ngram, the original “couldn’t care less” form is nearly 2.3 times more prevalent I believe Google Ngram as evidence for written communication usage. I do not believe it reflects casual spoken communication or is evidence one way or the other regarding it. And you really miss the point. Even _if_ it is not more preferred the idea is the same: _why_ has a become a competitive variant with staying power? Why do even a sizable minority prefer it? My problem with Pinker in this regard would be if he presents the hypothesis without any evidence to back it up. If so then it is just another just so story. ---
**Author:** ![Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/q.q.switcheroo/32/5713_2.png) [@Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.Q.Switcheroo)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/284 "2024-06-24T16:19:28Z")
> [@colinfred](#): > > But the people who say “could care less” don’t as a rule emphasise “could” which would make sense in the sarcasm argument. It is mainly said with no stress to any particular word And there’s the rub - if you’re saying how little you care, you’re unlikely to place much stress on any particular word, because that would make it sound like you care at least somewhat. Hence “I **could** n’t care less!” (which sounds so insistent! and earnest!) got elided down to “I could care less” (which sounds appropriately blasé and apathetic, logic be damned). ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/285 "2024-06-24T16:40:23Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > I believe Google Ngram as evidence for written communication usage. I do not believe it reflects casual spoken communication or is evidence one way or the other regarding it. Correct, but the written language is the only definitive record we have. Spoken language that consists of somebody mumbling something and someone else who may or may not hear it correctly is inherently messy and ambiguous and doesn’t reliably tell us much about which variant is being used. > [@DSeid](#): > > And you really miss the point. Even _if_ it is not more preferred the idea is the same: _why_ has a become a competitive variant with staying power? Why do even a sizable minority prefer it? How about because the speaker fails to enunciate clearly (as others have already suggested) and/or the listener mishears, and the listener then propagates this variant by repeating it? Why do you feel the need to reject out of hand the simplest possible explanation, and in the process accuse me of “missing the point”? And it’s not clear that a sizable minority are actually expressing a preference for it, as opposed to just unthinkingly repeating something they thought they heard. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/286 "2024-06-24T16:55:46Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > How about because the speaker fails to enunciate clearly (as others have already suggested) and/or the listener mishears, and the listener then propagates this variant by repeating it? Why do you feel the need to reject out of hand the simplest possible explanation, and in the process accuse me of “missing the point”? It’s the simple explanation. But the fake etymology is often the next step. People who continue using it this way when they know better need a reason that works for them, even if that isn’t why it originally came about. Like, if you hear someone say “nip it in the butt.” That was almost certainly a mishearing/missaying of “nip it in the bud,” cutting the metaphorical flower off before it can bloom. But I guarantee you a lot of people think it came from a metaphorical kid who you spank. I know I did. ---
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/287 "2024-06-24T17:05:33Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Like, if you hear someone say “nip it in the butt.” That was almost certainly a mishearing/missaying of “nip it in the bud,” cutting the metaphorical flower off before it can bloom. I would be annoyed if someone took this as an opportunity to correct the phrase. Both are essentially equivalent from context. Trying to correct the phrase can often be disruptive when the meaning is easily understood. For instance, in a thread about how to stop network security breaches, someone might say “Good passwords are a way to nip it in the butt.”. But then if someone jumps in with how the phrase is “… in the bud”, then the thread devolves into a bunch of back and forth about the correct phrase, why people thought one or the other was right, all the variations people have heard, etc. Whatever useful and meaningful discussion was happening before is lost because of someone being unnecessarily pedantic. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/288 "2024-06-24T17:06:18Z")
A better tactic would be to say “Did you know it was originally ‘nip it in the bud’?” ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/289 "2024-06-24T17:19:53Z")
Or, the dim bulb who misheard the saying can take the opportunity to learn something rather than presenting a vigorous defense of “excuse me while I kiss this guy.” ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/290 "2024-06-24T17:20:06Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > What Pinker claims is that “I could care less” is intentional sarcasm, and is intoned differently than the original expression to sarcastically convey the opposite of its literal meaning. Which is pretty much what I posited, right? ---
**Author:** ![colinfred](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colinfred/32/21338_2.png) [@colinfred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colinfred)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/291 "2024-06-24T17:23:11Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > Which is pretty much what I posited, right? You emphasised the wrong word. To denote sarcasm it would be “could”, not “care” that would be stressed. I think wolfpup was just basically disagreeing that the phenomenon of sarcastic stressing even exists. I haven’t heard it very much, if at all. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/292 "2024-06-24T17:26:30Z")
> [@colinfred](#): > > You emphasised the wrong word. To denote sarcasm it would be “could”, not “care” that would be stressed. Disagree, in that one can’t pack nearly as much sarcastic sneering into “could” as into a drawn-out emphasized “care”. Try saying both out loud and you’ll see what I mean. Including the mouth-shape involved in saying “care”. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/293 "2024-06-24T17:27:41Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > How about because the speaker fails to enunciate clearly (as others have already suggested) and/or the listener mishears, and the listener then propagates this variant by repeating it? Why do you feel the need to reject out of hand the simplest possible explanation, and in the process accuse me of “missing the point”? The fact that you interpret what I am saying as rejecting that is the solid evidence of your missing the point. Yeah, “butterfly” was a malaprop of the original “flutterby” but those who say “butterfly” are not morons, and there are likely reasons why “butterfly” won out. “Buckeroo” was a mishear or missaid of “vaquero” … so on. ---
**Author:** ![Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/q.q.switcheroo/32/5713_2.png) [@Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.Q.Switcheroo)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/294 "2024-06-24T17:40:33Z")
The most plausible theory I’ve seen for “could care less” is “negation by association” - the same reason you hear people say “I could give a damn” when they mean they _couldn’t_ give a damn: > Like _could care less_, _give a damn_ is a [Negative Polarity Item](http://www-personal.umich.edu/%7Ejlawler/aue/npi.html), that is, a phrase that is ordinarily used only within the scope of semantic negation of some kind (not, never, only, rarely, few, etc.). Hence the perceived strangeness of _They could give a damn_, which has no overt negative, but means the same thing as the same phrase with a negative. I.e, the business manager was saying that his members couldn’t give a damn. > _Give a damn_ is a member of the open _Minimal Direct Object_ class of NPI’s, like _lift a finger, drink a drop, do a thing, eat a bite_, etc. The implication of all of them is that, if one can’t even **Verb** a **Minimal Direct Object** , why, then, one couldn’t **Verb** any **Direct Object** at all. Thus it’s an idiomatic intensification of a negative. But it does usually require a negative to intensify. > However, there apparently is such a thing as negation by association. Like what happened to French _pas_ from _ne…pas_, which is now usable as a negative in its own right, from long association in the discontinuous morpheme with the overt negative _ne_, _give a damn_ and _could care less_ have, in American usage at least, come to have their own quasi-independent negative force. More at: [Language Log: Negation by Association](http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001202.html) ---
**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:** [June 24, 2024, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/295 "2024-06-24T18:07:31Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > > [@wolfpup](#): > > > > “I could care less” > > I’ve always thought that phrasing became popular because it’s so easily said with a sneer: “I could CAAAAARE less,” while the correct phrasing doesn’t carry the same load of disdain: “I _couldn’t_ care less.” > > Entirely my own conjecture, backed up by no evidence other than hearing them said. I only ever have used the proper form, but with a bit of lateral thinking, the “improper” form could be considered accurate. “I [probably] _could_ care less, but doing so would involve more effort than I’m prepared to devote to the project..” I like the mental contortions parsing that are likely to involve. 😈 ---
**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:** [June 24, 2024, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/296 "2024-06-24T18:15:47Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Oh. To join the “moron” pile on. While it is of course true that 50% of people are of below average intelligence, it is as true that 50% are above average. **It is basic math that a majority of people are not morons.** 🙂 ( **Bolding mine** ) Then basic math would suggest that exactly _zero_ percent of people are of exactly average intelligence. That strikes me as unlikely. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/297 "2024-06-24T18:19:39Z")
Very interesting analysis, thanks for posting. It hasn’t done a thing to change my dislike of the “could care less” construction, despite the explicatory exertions of some of the quoted linguists, especially John Lawler, but it’s an undeniably plausible explanation about how something that probably started as a mistake has endured even if its promulgators never quite understood why. Two side comments stood out for me. One was the statement that “This makes a lot more sense than Pinker’s sarcastic teenage intonation theory.” I fully agree – it definitely does. I always thought Pinker was way off base on this. But the other was the statement that George W Bush was one of those of the “I could care less” persuasion. Really? This is your endorsement? I think GWB is one of the strongest arguments for my position on the importance of standard English. Just a small sampling of the language evolution this linguistic genius has bestowed upon the world, celebrated, I’m sure, by descriptivists all over: > “You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.” —_Townsend, Tennessee, February 21, 2001_ > > “They misunderestimated me.” —_Bentonville, Arkansas, November 6, 2000_ > > “Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream.” —_LaCrosse, Wisconsin, October 18, 2000_ > > “I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family.” —_Greater Nashua, New Hampshire, January 27, 2000_ > > “Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?” _—Florence, South Carolina, January 11, 2000_ > > “I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully.” —_Saginaw, Michigan, September 29, 2000_ > > “Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.” —_Washington, D.C., August 5, 2004_ ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Mouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mighty_mouse/32/7776_2.png) [@Mighty\_Mouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Mouse)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/298 "2024-06-24T18:33:28Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > ( **Bolding mine** ) Then basic math would suggest that exactly _zero_ percent of people are of exactly average intelligence. That strikes me as unlikely. That’s exactly what basic math says about any attribute of a population that is continuous rather than discrete. The “average” might be a fractional number with arbitrary large precision (like 99.34576453980… forever) and there is precisely zero probability of any individual having exactly that number. If the average is the mean, that is. If there are an odd number of people in the population (say 7,694,521,803) then the 3,847,260,902nd person in the ranking is exactly the median, if that is what “average” means. Actually if it is discrete it’s very unlikely for a large population as well. Suppose that “intelligence” is not only measurable, it’s measurable in whole points. An individual can have an intelligence level (let’s call it IQ) of 105 or 93, but not 97.35. The mean, median and mode for billions of people will all be non integers values and no one can be “exactly average” ---
**Author:** ![Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/q.q.switcheroo/32/5713_2.png) [@Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.Q.Switcheroo)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/299 "2024-06-24T19:04:59Z")
[wrong thread] ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2024, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/300 "2024-06-24T19:16:10Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Yeah, “butterfly” was a malaprop of the original “flutterby” but those who say “butterfly” are not morons, and there are likely reasons why “butterfly” won out. “Buckeroo” was a mishear or missaid of “vaquero” … so on. But were the people who misheard and propagated the changes academics? Because I have it on good authority that only academics can make meaningful changes to language. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135.md?page=16)