“If I was” instead of “If I were” drives me nuts.
A regional one that I just don’t written but is okay is speach: “I’m going to do this* bein’s * I should.” Please, please, use “because.”
And, one that I am guilty of “a whole 'nuther” instead of “another whole” - my sister pointed it out to me when I was a kid, but I have not been able to break myself of it.
“A regional one that I just don’t written but is okay is speach” :smack:
I missed a word or two there and had a typo. I don’t like that particular word in written language, but it’s okay in speech. Ugh!
Then what is “speach”?
I suggest we define it as a regional one that you just don’t written, but is okay.
The downside of more people becoming aware of the fewer/less distinction is that now some people seem to think they should always use “fewer.” I have seen, in print, published by respectable media outlets, constructions like: “fewer than five miles” and “fewer than three hours.” No, people. When dealing with individual units, like people, apples, and items, it’s “fewer.” When it’s infinitely divisible quantities like time or distance, “less” is required, and “fewer” is just plain wrong.
One thing that was heard quite frequently in the last two decades of the 20th century, but thankfully seems to be less common these days is “What it is, is…” It wasn’t often seen in print, but it was very common in speech, and it just pissed me off. Good riddance.
Here’s a point that I have decided to give up on*: the lie/lay distinction. It’s been an uphill battle trying to persuade people that they should lay a book on a table, but that they must lie down for a nap. If you listen to what ordinary people actually say, there seems to be nearly universal agreement in usage. Lie means “to tell an untruth,” and lay means “to recline.” When you think about it, it’s a reasonable and useful distinction, and the old “correct” usage seems pedantic and pointless.
However, I will not give up on the imply/infer distinction, despite the fact that there are historical precedents for using the words interchangeably. That distinction is meaningful and worth maintaining.
*Or should I have said, “Up on which I have decided to give”?
That can, depending on what you are saying, be acceptable. If I were is used for situations where you aren’t [whatever]. If i was is used for situations in which you are [whatever].
It’s not unlike that I am vs. that I be. The former indicates something that is the case; the latter indicates something that is preferred.
And depending on audience, this can also be acceptable. If you’re trying to blend in with the crowd, changing your language patterns can be crucial.
Actually, it’d properly technically be a whole other, since another is constructed from an and other. A whole other and another whole can actually mean significantly different things depending on context. (Think of a whole other issue vs. another whole issue; the former calls for something strikingly different, whereas the latter merely requires the entirety of some other issue, which could be pretty well identical.)
Not unless you, as with Lowth, Dryden et al., think English is ugly and needs some Latin to spruce it up a bit. Lowth’s well-meant but entirely needless intrusion is what we have to thank for the rubbish rules on prepositions and ends of sentences, splitting infinitives and double negatives.
Furthermore, it ignores the fact that more than one preposition can also function as an adverb. To, for, up, on and off are some, and I’d bet good money there are more.
I’m originally from Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, Canada, where it’s not “Where are you at?” or “Where are you?”
It’s “Where y’at, b’y? Hooooly Jeeeesus, how’dja get dere?”
I have a feeling none of you would understand a word I say if you were to hear me talk. 
Well, actually, I speak clearly most of the time - until I become excited about something and then hello, Cape Breton accent! Lard tunderin’!
I’m pretty sure all my peeves have been mentioned already. I, too, hate when people think it’s always “Joe and I”. “Hey, come drinking with Joe and I! Oh wait, Joe’s not coming, so just come drinking with I!”
“Pacific”, meaning “specific” with a silent S for some fuckin’ reason. Correcting my boss would not have been wise. :smack:
Why, Gaudere, so pleased you could drop in! 
The OP seems to prefer “I had fewer apples than him”
As a non-native english speaker that sounds wrong to me, I would have thought it is “fewer apples than he”
But since it went unchallenged in a 2 page thread on language and grammar, it must be correct. So, can someone explain the correct grammar rule to me?
I once endured a minutes-long rant when, out to lunch one day, the hostess asked us if we’d like to be seated “downstairs” or “upstairs”. When she led us “upstairs” we went up… one stair.
Thus leading to the “should have been upstair/downstair” rant over lunch. And the lesson is: don’t go out to lunch with engineers.
“The reason is because…” and my mother’s Old New England “On account of because…”
Or how about the other option, that you feel trying to come up with the longest/most ridiculous string of prepositions to insert into a sentence is one of the best games ever? It’s very popular in my office, and visitors must think we are absolute freaks. We usually manage to keep it out of our written materials.
It isn’t correct. We didn’t all of us scour the OP for mistakes:)
I read an interesting analysis awhile ago that suggested people tend to use “different than” to introduce a clause. “Paris is different from London, but when I went to Paris last year, it was different than I remembered it being.” I like that distinction.
It didn’t used to, but it’s transitioning into one.
I find it kinda charming. I’ve got a history professor now, deep South kinda guy, brilliantly incisive and extremely knowledgeable, who uses “anymore” to mean “these days” probably once per lecture. It still startles me, but I like it.
Daniel
As I said, this is sometimes true. Interrobang?! covered the issue beautifully; thanks!
That was Ghanima, not I.
Daniel
The less/fewer distinction drives me nuts, too. To be specific, that many (including Dopers in this thread) seem to think that these need to be differentiated at all. “Less” has been used as the equivalent of “fewer” for hundreds of years, until some 18th century grammarians with a sticks up their asses decided that the language couldn’t have these two words mean the same thing. These are the same grammarians who decided that one must never split an infinitive nor end a sentence with a preposition.
Yesterday I was driving to work and was stuck behind a plumbing company van. The back window read “Are you paying to much for your plumbing?” Excuse me, to much? Are you kidding? They must be able to lower prices by not hiring anyone with the capability to spell or use grammar properly.
And no, I checked and the other “o” had not fallen off or anything; it was never there.
Which Dopers in this thread are you indirectly addressing?
Is it really that hard to read upthread? 
Major peeve of mine: the adjective used where an adverb should go.
Here in England, it seems that anyone commentating on a sports broadcast is required by law not to know what an adverb is. “He was passing the ball brilliant”, “She likes to return serve quick”, “I thought they were playing exceptional”.
The error is usually one of several in the same sentence. “The boys done great, and was playing brilliant”.
Other pet peeves: people who cannot grasp the difference between its and it’s, and there and their. We all have our flaws, blind spots and things that we find hard to learn. But these are really so simple to understand.