Which leads to that saying: “If worse comes to worst.” Or is it “If worst comes to worst”? I’ve always thought the former, meaning if an already-bad situation goes completely tits up. But some think it’s the latter, reasoning it means if the worst thing than can possibly happen does end up happening.
Do you care about being considered ignorant?
If sherbert/sherbet is their test then no, not really.
It’s too late to root out the first two. Plus, I don’t want to needlessly make enemies of colonels and lieutenants. When people like that become anti-imperialist, the world shakes, metaphorically and literally. The sooner that happens, the better.
Guess you could say it’s like “snuck” - in the dictionary because of common usage. I don’t expect a radio announcer for NPR to be using it. 
I know, and it’s a tragedy.
It’s attested in the OED back to 1814. I think you can relax about it.
The word is not used in the UK – here, someone who does that job is an “estate agent”. But, how can one not pronounce “realtor” with three syllables? I don’t mean to be snotty – am just a bit bemused.
Comedian David Cross doesn’t like it when people misuse the word “literally.”
(NSFW)
“Unthawed, unthawing.” My co-workers say this all the time. It drives me batty. I keep asking them if that means they put it back in the freezer. 
These same co-workers keep trying to find ways to do things “more easier” and of the course the superlative, “most easiest.” :rolleyes:
Spicket instead of spigot.
One I’ve seen on the Internet a lot lately: “I’m really bored of this.” When did this start? It should be “bored by” or “bored with”.
A nearby town is named “Leavenworth”, and I’ve run into a lot of people who, for some reason, insist upon inserting an extraneous “s” into the middle of the word: “Leavensworth”.
Another one I’ve been seeing/hearing a lot lately: “sooner than later” 
I’ve never heard these constructions before, but they make sense to me. Don’t think of the word “sat” like a gerund, but rather as an adjective. It’s similar to saying something like
I set the centerpiece on the table. The centerpiece is set on the table.
– or –
I stood the ladder against the wall. The ladder is stood against the wall.
In the second example, I would probably use “is standing” rather than “is stood”, but “is stood” seems to reinforce a past action of the ladder being placed against the wall rather than it merely existing there.
I guess the sentence, “I’m sat at the pub”, is a little different, since no external agent plunked me down in my stool, but it makes the sentence seem a little more fun and whimsical.
What’s wrong with seriouser? If something can be “curiouser and curiouser”, why not “seriouser”?
The difference is
ree al tor
vs
ree lah tor
Some might argue whether “real” is one syllable or two. Is it two syllables, or one syllable with a dipthong?
It’s an attempt to protect a word that has a legitimate usage that is losing its ability to do that job, the same way really has already lost that ability. Really has long since become ambiguous, too late to fight that battle, but why should we give up on literally?
I suck at impromptu examples. The linked David Cross audio was pretty good.
“Dude, that was so funny, I literally shit my pants!”
“Oh, so what did you do about your pants?”
“What do you mean?”
“Well, you literally shit your pants, so what did you do?”
“No, dude, I just meant it was funny.”
The real problem is not that it isn’t clear that someone is being hyperbolic - you’re right that most of the time it’s clear they’re exaggerating. The problem is the word loses it’s ability to be used in the cases you actually mean “literally”, the same way “really” has already lost it’s clarity. If you actually mean something happened, you have to go out of your way to emphasize that you mean it really, literally, actually happened, and that you’re not exaggerating.
A Realtor (pronounced REAL-tor) is someone who is a member of the National Association of Realtors. Most agents do belong, but there is no law that requires them to, and NAR is a private organization.
Belonging gets you many benefits such as access to Multiple Listing Services (MLS), a free legal hotline, legal training, automatic agreements for sharing commissions, and discounts for services like cellphones, websites and car rentals. But if you would not benefit from these, you might not belong. Agents who limit themselves to selling single developments or timeshares sometimes do not.
States require licensing of agents (there could be exceptions), but joining NAR is optional.
See, I don’t think it’s a good example because I question the idea that anyone would be confused about whether he really shat his pants. I do not see in regular discourse people confusing the intensifier meaning with the traditional meaning so I don’t put a lot of stock in invented scenarios as I don’t see them as reflecting the reality I know.
“I would rather do it sooner than later” is correct, but most of the time it should be “I will do that sooner or later”.
“Set” is the word for placing something somewhere. “Sat” is the word for taking the action yourself. If you sit down, then you sat down. The only time I can think where “I was sat down” makes sense is if you are being escorted by a host/hostess and told where to sit.
Either “is standing” or “was stood”, but not “is stood”. Standing is the present tense, stood is the past tense. If you did it in the past, use was and past tense, if you are talking about the present, use is and the present tense.
I was picking on my brother, and mom gave me a time out. She put me here. :mad:
Yes, dad had to run, he put me here and told me to wait for my mother to come get me.
He tried to get up, but the busdriver wouldn’t let him.
That’s the meaning derived from those phrasings.
I’ve heard it with “peed my pants”, and that one I think could be misconstrued.
Invented scenarios suck.
Yeah, that “rather” needs to be in there somewhere. What I’m seeing is sentences like, “If this keeps up, sooner than later people are going to get mad.”
And I forgot one I wanted to list: The owner of the local GMC/Buick dealer does a lot of his own radio commercials. His latest ad has him talking about buying locally instead of going out of town for things, in order to support the community. He speaks specifically of local money helping schools, and he mentions school athletics. Except he pronounces “athletics” with four syllables: “athaletics” :dubious:
Then I have no idea what you meant here:
What’s really not what?
I wouldn’t presume to ask you to. In any case, correct use of words improves clarity. Treating words that are not synonyms as though they were reduces clarity.
Funnily enough, I’d use it without batting an eye. But I do find it interesting that we’re adding a new adverbial form, when adverb forms tend to be disappearing in general. “Drive careful!” Irregardlessly [snicker], “funnily” beats the heck out of “in a funny way” for brevity.
It’d be 3 if you say “Ree-al-tor”, or 2 if you say “Reel-tor”. There’s little difference between the two, when said quickly (normally). The objection is to “Reel-a-tor”, which is fairly common.
I agree. There’s a big difference between formal writing and casual conversation. Using the term “literally” that way wouldn’t be advised in formal writing. Novels are somewhere between the two extremes. Good writers make sure they convey what they mean to convey, but certainly don’t need to be bound by fussy rules of grammar.
Regarding rules like “Don’t being a sentence with a conjunction” and “Don’t have a paragraph with one sentence” – these aren’t rules, they’re training wheels. They’re like “Don’t use goto” in programming. When you’re learning, it’s best to follow them, so they become more or less automatic. Ideally, you learn to communicate well and naturally while following them. Later, as you learn the reasons for the rules and reasons to break them, you use judgment as to when they should apply. Eventially this becomes natural, too.
And I will admit that I break some rules more often than I should. 
I read Musicat, post #215, as chiding his fellow-members of the profession for saying the word as “realtor”, only with three syllables – perhaps I misunderstood. I – UK citizen and resident, English – definitely pronounce “real” as two syllables (or – I’m no linguist – at the outside, “one-and-three-quarters” / with, as you say, a diphthong). I’d find it difficult-verging-on-impossible to say “realtor” as other than a three-syllable word.