Any of these will grow a tree in your stomach, you know.
It is certainly stupid to use language in a creative manner. We should all be forced to follow the unbending rules of spelling, grammer, and phraseology. The coinage of new words should not be allowed, and all combinations of words that could be considered a phrase should be codified, and those that vary from the official list should be executed. Stabbed to death with a pen, not a sword. It is no wonder at all that the world is such a mess with people uttering any old string of terms that convey meaning without adherence to the divine syntax. I can feel the threat of this continuing travesty in the pit of my arm.
When your creativity doesn’t make sense, it just promotes stupidity. You know, the thing this entire board is supposed to be against.
And, anyways, one can’t be creative when one doesn’t know they are breaking the rules in the first place.
Reminds me of the TV commercial from several years ago with several coworkers conversing in a break room - one of them gobsmacked at learning that the correct phrase is “fringe benefits,” rather than “French benefits” as he had always thought.
Perfect username/post combo!
“Dead-on-balls accurate,” to quote Marisa Tomei in My Cousin Vinny.
Agreed.
There are limits to this argument. Or, to coin a phrase, Nar op hoon zinferable klang zedoom. I’m sure you know what I mean.
I see people cause disappointment, confusion and actual physical harm often enough through their sloppy use of language and inattention to detail in communication that I don’t find the descriptivist/relativist/“let morons be morons” argument very comforting.
Change happens over time, but the Internet has introduced a vastly greater rate of change than has previously existed – it’s not comparable to (previously) normal linguistic drift when my typo or Bob’s misunderstanding of a common phrase can hit 50 million page views by Tuesday and be copied to every corner of the earth with a few mouseclicks. Whether this is as bad a thing as it appears, it’s too early to say, but it’s also clearly too early to say “it’ll be all right” and it’s clearly wrong to say “this is a normal thing that’s happened before.”
English speakers have inherited this beautiful, flexible, potent tool, which an ordinary person can use reliably even if that person isn’t very smart. But the Internet and text-messaging have encouraged laziness and carelessness and also made it easy for people who previously might have been justifiably shy about their writing skills to reach millions. So we see a certain amount of communication from people who could not be reasonably classified as “ordinary” or even “not very smart.”
To me, it feels like anything encouraging the dismantling of this useful and effective language is the equivalent of breaking Mozart’s fingers or blinding Michelangelo or silencing James Earl Jones. It’s destroying art. And I’m not talking about ordinary change – I don’t want to lock Michelangelo in a cage and never let him have life experiences. I just don’t want some Youtube dumbass to put his eyes out.
So you’re saying that it’s six and a half dozen of one another?
Ah, but this is not correct. If it’s possible to have something in the pit of your stomach, then your stomach has a pit. In that regard, we all have pits in our stomachs.
Only slightly related, the other day a friend e-mailed me and said that she sucks at math. I asked if that meant that she was more of a language person. She replied “Defanatly.”
I have to come clean and admit I have a pit in my heart.
I’m in favor of people using language incorrectly. I can more easily pick out the idiots if they sound like idiots.
What’s wrong with this phrase? It is not a mis-statement of a known phrase like the example in the OP, and it has a clear meaning: don’t ask if the preparations went well; you’ll know when you see/taste/experience the output.
I don’t invoke it much myself, but am confused as to what’s wrong with it.
I HATE “my bad”. It started out as “my bag”, as in “I screwed up, I’m the one left holding the bag”. At some point, some idiot got it wrong, and all of his idiot friends got it wrong, etc.
Another one is “I know, right?”
I don’t know, DO YOU? How the hell am I supposed to know what you know and what you don’t know? Why are you asking me??
Originally “The proof of the pudding is in the eating.” Proof in this usage meaning “test” (like in “Proving Grounds.”)
I don’t much care about how language shifts, but bad etymology really gets on my nerves.
Seriously, I would love to know where you picked up the “my bag” = “my bad” link. It’s always been used as an alternative to “my fault” and “mea culpa.”
It did? I dispute that. It makes more sense to me that “my bad” is just shorthand for “my mistake”.
I recognize that language is an ever-evolving thing. But that doesn’t change the fact that some people are just going to use words incorrectly, or inadvertently make up their own words, simply because they don’t know any better. Example: agreeance. I’ve started hearing this when “agreement” was intended. First from a co-worker, then just last night on TV (full disclosure: Lil C, judging on So You Think You Can Dance). As in, “I’m in agreeance with what that guy just said”.
Maybe you’re so cutting edge that you’re trying to coin a new word (albeit one that has no advantage over the right word, but you just want to be different), but it doesn’t change the fact that it makes you sound ignorant.
I seriously doubt that.
Bosstone has it right. I’ve never heard the expression “my bag”. Googling “my bag” reveals approximately zero hits referring to that particular colloquialism, whereas Googling “my bad” reveals approximately a bajillion.
Moreover, “left holding the bag” implies having responsibility thrust upon you against your will; “my bad,” “my fault” and “mea culpa” all refer to a willing admission/acceptance of responsiblity/guilt.
This all goes back to what I wrote in my post upthread: people who attempt use these expressions should study them a bit first.
Here’s an example of crystal-clear communication in a phone call I just received:
“[Your bosses] [name of laboratory] some guy is here. One? Never mind.”
“What are you asking?”
Eventually, it turned out the story was “A visitor has arrived at the front desk for a 1:00 meeting between [name of laboratory] and, well, we’re not sure, but it might be your agency…but does not know who his contact is. Could it be your bosses? Are they scheduled for such a meeting?”
The answer, of course, is “No.”
Apparently the original strategy was just to say key words until I recognized the issue and agreed to take over the problem.
.