“As far as”, without the accompanying “goes” or"is concerned". Like “As far as country music, I don’t mind Johnny Cash”. What? As far as it? What does that mean?
And “by far and away”. Two similar but different phrases, run together. Makes no sense.
[QUOTE=Siam Sam]
Does anyone ever hyphenate “blowjob”? Blow-job. The British, perhaps?
[/QUOTE]
In the UK, a blowjob is an oral concept and not a written one.
I used to work with a woman who always referred to the rest of us as “yous guys.” And if she was referring to something belonging to us, she would say, “yous guys’s.”
It kind of bothers me that so many people think that anything about language is about grammar.
When someone confuses effect/affect or rebut/refute, it has nothing to do with grammar.
Even the OP is not really about grammar; it’s about punctuation. It’s only relevant in writing. Granted, grammar and punctuation intersect in writing, but they’re not the same thing. You can’t hear a hyphen, but you can hear Bob and I vs. Bob and me.
And 12:00 am vs. 12:00 pm? That clearly has nothing to do with grammar.
[QUOTE=tbdi]
The one that makes me cringe is ‘affect’ for ‘effect’ and vice-versa. That and people who go around constantly loosing things.
[/QUOTE]
A couple of months back I read about people ‘loosing things’ so much in emails and on MBs that I thought the spelling had changed or I’d gone mad. Thankfully neither of these are true…
[QUOTE=Siam Sam]
Does anyone ever hyphenate “blowjob”? Blow-job. The British, perhaps?
[/QUOTE]
Just because they can’t cook doesn’t mean they can’t write.
Little Dan and I one arrived at the movie theater at 11:30 PM, Wednesday night to buy tickets for the first showing of a summer blockbuster advt for 12:01 AM Thursday. The ticket taker looked at us like we were nuts and said that it wasn’t until the next day (I know, I know , but we knew what she meant). We were unable to convince the theater manager that they had listed it incorrectly.
One common error that irritates me is “no end” versus “to no end”. A lot of people seem to think that the latter means the former.
If something bothers me no end, then it does so ceaselessly, or it causes me unlimited amounts of bother. But if it bothers me to no end, it does so pointlessly.
[QUOTE=seosamh]
There’s a bloody great advertisement on the London Underground (for example, on the northbound Northern Line platform at Embankment) at the moment trumpeting the improvement work they’re doing. It proudly boasts, “New signals mean less delays”…
[/QUOTE]
Speaking for myself, me personally, the way I read this, it means "new signals indicate lesser delays.
Now, if they’d written “New signals means reduced delays”, we could infer ; “The fact of our having installed new signals means etc”. Then again, is that really what means means ?
Feel like sending them another email ?
This is not bad grammar, just annoying usage
When people use “revert” instead of “reply”
“In actual fact…”
“Now currently…”
tentage
[QUOTE=Siam Sam]
The OP is correct. Adverbs ending in -ly almost never need a hyphen, because it should be plain to all and sundry what is modifying and what is being modified.
Does anyone ever hyphenate “blowjob”? Blow-job. The British, perhaps?
[/QUOTE]
Or perhaps the aforementioned CamelCase. BlowJob.
Yes, sentence fragments. And another! And another! Etc.
At least I didn’t say “ect”.
“I’m doing good” in response to “How are you?” or other polite inquiries about one’s health/well-being bother me intensely. I tend to be a wee bit passive aggressive with this and respond with “I’m doing well[; how are you?].” Sometimes people are stunned by my initial response and parrot the “I am doing well” bit to my inquiry, and sometimes it just goes over their head.
Any time I hear “I am doing good,” I tend towards thinking up responses that are quite snarky. “Well, Mother Theresa, what good things have you done today?” I realize that using a snarky response like this would only end in the other person’s puzzlement at me changing the subject and being accusatory.
It is my wish that English speakers would all learn that there is no such word as “supposably”. At least I can’t think of a sentence in which it could be used.
The word is “supposedly”.
Say it out loud. Use it three times in conversation. Write it a hundred times on the blackboard. “Supposedly”.
Damn, I finally got that off my chest.
[QUOTE=RikWriter]
The one that grates on me is using terms such as “fairly unique,” “very unique.” etc..
Unique means one of a kind. You can’t be “very one of a kind.”
[/QUOTE]
I always take “very unique” to mean ‘not very many of’.
[QUOTE=AHunter3]
You think that’s bad? How about “Sally gave a blowjob to myself and Bob”.
:o :eek: :smack:
[/QUOTE]
Perhaps Sally PRESSURIZED you and Bob into a blowjob.
People - the word is PRESSURED. Therefore: Sally pressured you and Bob into letting her give you a blowjob. 
[QUOTE=Themenin]
Speaking for myself, me personally, the way I read this, it means "new signals indicate lesser delays.
Now, if they’d written “New signals means reduced delays”, we could infer ; “The fact of our having installed new signals means etc”. Then again, is that really what means means ?
Feel like sending them another email ?
[/QUOTE]
Whoosh!
The complaint is of the less vs. fewer variety, not the “mean” part.
Anyone have Sally’s email or phone number?
[QUOTE=RikWriter]
The one that grates on me is using terms such as “fairly unique,” “very unique.” etc.. Unique means one of a kind. You can’t be “very one of a kind.”
[/QUOTE]
Amen. Other peeves o’ mine:
It’s = contraction for “It is”
Its = means “belongs to”
Meaningless quotation marks in ads and signage, as in, “Try our ‘delicious’ new burgers,” which inadvertently undercut the message. Way to show what a moron you are.
When you say “I could care less,” it means that you actually do care, if only a little. If you really don’t care at all (which I think is what you’re trying to say), try “I couldn’t care less.”
Saying “anymore” when you really mean “nowadays”: “Gasoline has gotten so expensive anymore.” Aiyeee!
[QUOTE=vetbridge]
Anyone have Sally’s email or phone number?
[/QUOTE]
A blowjob from Sally: Its a really “unique” experience. 
[QUOTE=essell]
Well, I’m the opposite of a grammar expect, but surely the “more” applies to the union before the one described in the Constitution not the perfect one. It’s a comparison.
Surely something that’s perfect would be “more perfect” than something that isn’t perfect.
And likewise, isn’t something thats close to perfect “more perfect” than something that’s average ?
[/QUOTE]
Actually, I think the Framers were using “perfect” in its earlier sense: “complete”. “A more complete union” sounds okay to me, especially if you think of it in the sense of “thorough”.