Bear in mind that Bryson is primarily a humorous writer. His books about English are great, and I generally agree with his beliefs abiut prescriptivism/descriptivism- especially regarding what douches Fowler and Webster were- but he’s often hugely inaccurate about factual stuff.
I know it is an accepted usage over here, but every time I hear burglarized I cannot help but think the speaked is a moron. 'Course, they’re usually newscasters, so it’s not like I’m wrong.
Actually, robbery and burglary are not synonymous. In robbery, the robber is generally directly confronting the robbee; in burglary, the burglar is generally burgling from a building in which either there are no occupants, or the occupants are unaware of the burglar.
Friend of mine sometimes says “I’ll approach the subject” instead of “I’ll broach the subject” another’ll say “Well, I don’t mean to put a hamper on anything” instead of a “damper”. Both do it deliberatley for a chuckle (I think/hope)
Okay, so along these lines, am I right to mentally cringe every time my Shakespeare professor talks about Henry IV being ‘coronated’? It is supposed to be crowned, isn’t it? Somebody please tell me I haven’t lost my mind. He’s a good teacher, but this is just making me crazy. I guess it’s a good thing we’re on to Othello now.
Our school principal has a couple times even typed out the phrase “illicit a response”.
As for “finna”, I first encountered that from little black kids I was teaching. I too decided it was a contraction of “fixing to”, which I’d only heard before from my college buddy from Dallas.
You know what I hate? “Acclimated” instead of “acclimatised.” Another American usage which is apparently universally accepted, but it still makes me grind my teeth.
Orientate instead of Orient.
Commentate instead of Comment.
Utilise instead of Use.
“No love was lost between them” when used to mean they hate each other; the phrase actually means the exact opposite - all the love between them was retained, none has been lost.
Mine is “We’ll come to that cross when we bridge to it”. Although on review, for causal correctness it should perhaps be “We’ll bridge to that cross when we come to it”.
Oh, man, the memories! My wife had a TITANIC fight with an associate who INSISTED that “hone in on” was a perfectly good use. Of course the real issue was he hated being corrected. He eventually developed the thesis (which, tellingly, he did NOT present early in the argument, showing that he had made it up entirely while searching for justification) that he meant he was “sharpening his focus” on the target, hence, “honing” was acceptable.
I wanted him to send us the rest of his argument by honing pigeon.
Gaaah! Wife does that one too. Threatens she will be nipping me in the butt all the time, too. Is that good or bad?
When I was young, I was pretty sure that an avid basketball player as a basketballer who had contracted AIDS. More a word than a phrase, but still…
The now-famous Ima as in Ima let you finnish, Ima go get a drink, Ima smack you in da face. How do you possibly squish I’m going to, I’m fixing to, I’m about to into one tiny syllable and 3 letters? This annoyed me long before the kanye thing.