I’ve never heard “so it is” (granted, my regional is a ways away from your regional), but here’s my nomination:
Gas is so expensive anymore. No. You mean it’s so expensive “nowadays”, or “these days”, or “relative to a year ago”.
It also annoys me that people have some burning desire to add “'s” after the name of every restaurant and cafe that doesn’t have a name in the possessive. “Milano’s Coffee”–no, asshat, Milano is a city, not a person, and the coffee doesn’t belong to that city. It’s Milano Coffee. Or “Benihana’s”. Grr.
“Such as it is” reminds me of “for what it’s worth.” I think they both mean, well, this is what I’ve got to offer, although I acknowledge that it may not be as meaningful or exciting to you as it is to me. Here it is, either way.
But I don’t think it, or any of the other explanations here, quite caught the meaning. It means “a statement that assumes as proven something that hasn’t been”; the assumed truth may or may not be the thing under discussion.
“Why is Ignatz so lazy?”
“Because he’s Elbonian”
“Ah, no wonder”
The middle statement begs the question as to whether Elbonians are indeed constitutionally lazy, whereas the thing under discussion was why Ignatz is lazy. The point of proof has moved from Ignatz being lazy to Elbonians being lazy, without either conversant noticing that nothing has actually been proved.
Did they mean that playing baseball was the pastime of that following baseball was America’s pastime. I always thought of it as the former (perhaps influenced by George Carlin) but not that I really think about it I think they might have meant the latter.
Well, guess that all depends on what it is you do.
When I was a kid, my parents took me for karate lessons (was too expensive so I didn’t actually get to go) and I heard them talking about the payment plan options, one of which was 90 days same as cash. I’d never heard of that before that time and my young brain interpreted that to mean, if you stayed in the class for 90 days, it was as if you had paid for it. Sounded like a great deal to me.
I don’t get the distinction, could you possibly explain it?
As for the OP: I hate it when people misuse “Sour Grapes” as if it means the outcome wasn’t what was expected. When the definition is clearly and unalterably “disparagement of something that is unattainable.”
Originally, “anymore” was pretty much limited to negatives, e.g:
Since I’m on a low-carb diet, I don’t eat anything but meat and salads anymore.
Now a frequent usage has become:
What with being on a low-carb, anymore I eat only meat and salads.
It’s a subtle distinction, but it’s very real. When I was a child, you never would have heard the second usage.
That’s the funny thing. I’m a third-gen Canadian from irish/british stock. (My last name is March, dontchaknow) My wife and her family? Italians all. But she’s the one sayin’ it and I’m the one that doesn’t get it.
“Anymore” is like “nobody” to “anybody”, or “never” to “ever”, or “neither” to “either”. “Anymore” is for negative statements (It’s just not ______ anymore) whereas a positive statement would work much better with something like “nowadays” or “these days” (It’s just so _____ nowadays/these days/etc).
I hear it more and more here, particularly among the uneducated hick community (I go to school just east of the city proper, where that community is relatively strong in numbers).
