Yeah, I knew, or thought I did, that tortoises were a subset of turtles, which are in turn one of the main orders of reptiles. Consulting Wikipedia, it turns out that this may be one of those things that’s different in American vs. British English.
I find them funny. What are you going to do about it?
Also, is this the place for me to rant about the misuse of “Begging the question” some more? That is seriously going to result in homicide, or at least a foot through my TV someday.
Knock yourself out. Point is, Seagull, is a perfectly OK common name. In everyday terms, it’s not even wrong. I live less than 10 miles from the coast. If I drive to the beach, I am guaranteed to encounter gulls. Back here at home, I will only generally see them rarely - i.e. if it’s stormy and they have come inland a bit for shelter.
So I (like most people, presumably including the people who coined the word) most commonly see gulls when I also see the sea. Seaweed, seashells, sea beet, sea poppies, sea kale, seagulls. There isn’t a factual error here.
Arabia is a peninsula in southwest Asia.
Arabian is an adjective that associates a noun with that geographical region.
Arab is a person who self-identifies with the historical culture of Arabia, but is not necessarily of Arabian ancestry. Pronounced with unstressed second syllable.
Arabic is an adjective to describe a language spoken in that region and elsewhere, and for the alphabet used in many unrelated languages. When standing alone as a noun, it refers to the language.
Islam is a religion. Islamic is an adjective that associates a noun with that religion.
Islamism is an overt emphasis on the values or influence of Islam
Muslim/Moslem, a noun, is a person of the Islamic religion.
Mohammedan, a term found in earlier texts for both the religion and its adherents, as both noun and adjective…
I’m trying to think of an instance where you could replace “quash” with “squash” and substantially change the meaning, and I can’t come up with any.
The converse, obviously, is much easier.
Scuba divers very rarely use OXYGEN TANKS. Air, yes. Other gas blends, yes. But not pure oxygen.
Pure oxygen may prompt a seizure or oxygen toxicity at depths greater than about 20 feet/6 meters. Pure oxygen is only used by scuba divers in specialized situations - as a component of a rebreather system or for very shallow water decompression stops - very rare circumstances.
The best differentiation I’ve read was by a former Muslim extremist who said “Islam is a religion, Islamism is a political movement”.
Stepped foot instead of set foot
Tact instead of tack
Phased instead of fazed
Worse instead of worst
The undocumented immigration of the UK “years on” instead of the American “years later”
“So” at the beginning of every goddamn spoken first paragraph now
I’ve given up ranting about this. If it meant anything at all other than “raising the question,” I could understand, but it doesn’t. The phrase has been misappropriated from philosophy for absolutely no reason.
I agree. I used to live right on the beach, and was subjected to those filthy creatures and their incessant screeching 24/7. They weren’t just gulls; they were fucking seagulls.
And while we’re at it, “coining a phrase” doesn’t just mean USING a phrase, it means inventing a new one.
Never having lived actually right on the coast, I always find their cries atmospheric when I hear them echoing over the cobbles of a quaint seaside town, but yeah, I imagine that wears off pretty damn fast.
Another name for them around these parts is ‘shite hawks’
Only early in the morning. They can be loud just after sunrise. (actually all day, but you notice it a lot more while trying to sleep in)
My contribution"
writing “advice” when they mean “advise.”
How about “loose” when you mean “lose”?
" ‘Seagulls’ versus "Gulls’ ": a late aunt-by-marriage of mine was basically an excellent and very kindly person; but tended toward being rather abrasive – and toward pedantry. She was an impassioned birder, and liable to be very particular about the correct naming and describing of birds. This one was a particular hot button for her: “Don’t call them ‘seagulls’, dammit – they’re GULLS !” My sentiments – even about subjects re which I’m passionate – incline more to “in the grand scheme of things, does it matter all that much?”
It’s irritating, but it does serve a real and useful purpose: it’s “staking a claim” and announcing, “I’m about to start talking, so don’t interrupt.” It’s akin to “Well…” I think it comes from the more rapid pace of conversation these days, possibly driven by the (average) shorter attention span acquired from watching TV.
(Just try telling a long, rambling anecdote these days. People listen to the first two sentences, then interrupt and start telling their own life stories!)
(Remember the joke in “Demolition Man” about mini-songs, which were just advertising jingles? Not funny, guys!)
Oh thank god, this drives me nuts and I thought I was the only one. I mean how difficult is it to get right?
On a sidenote I find it kind of amusing that until recently the equivalent UK system was known as the ‘Bikini State’.
While we’re talking about “accuracy”: “Accuracy” and “precision” are two different things, and neither is quite the same as “correctness”. If you’re measuring the length of a piece of string using a meterstick that only has markings every ten centimeters, then that’s imprecise. If you’re measuring it using a meterstick that has the end cut off it, then that’s inaccurate. If you’re measuring it using a thermometer, that’s incorrect.
here, here!
FFS.
<snip>
Ray Stevens notwithstanding,** Ā**-rab is a town in Alabama.
Ensure vs. insure.
I see “insure” used frequently in printed material and news reports to say “to make sure that X will happen”–professional writers should know better.
But a quick Google search shows that some word authorities deem the terms interchangeable. Ugh.
That’s because your “rule” is a modern fiction; professional writers know better.