Add me to the “boots on the ground” dislike – when used in a military context it’s denigrating, at best, to the men and women who are serving and makes them sound like assets more than people. When used in anything but a military context, the speaker sounds like an ass.
My personal peeve is beginning a sentence (written or spoken) with “That being said,” or the more brief but equally off-putting “That said,” after having written or spoken something and then wanting to transition to something else. I stop listening before that transition occurs.
Also, beginning a statement with “I will say this:” – the person stating “I will say this:” wants to sound like an authority on whatever the topic is and his/her audience cannot possibly wait any longer to hear what else the person has to say, but they really don’t sound like anything but an ass.
I’m not sure what you mean. Could you give real-life examples without X and Y?
I say that, but it means something specific. It means "I have set up a paradigm, and now I am going to give what seems like a contradiction, but then explain how it still fits in my paradigm.
I have a boss who has made this his new favorite expression in the past couple of years. He’s not the brightest bulb in the marquee, but I think he imagines it somehow gives his crude statements a little sophistication.
I laugh to myself every time, and every time is a LOT, unfortunately.
…Oh, the other day I heard someone at work talking about the Farmer’s Almanac’s predictions for this winter’s weather and she said something like “cold if not as bad as last year,” emphasizing the “as bad as last year” part (which was pretty bad), as if she didn’t get the “if not” part.
That’s a terrible example, but I just meant that “X if not Y” means that Y is always greater than X.
“Game on”, as in “if you do this again, it’s gonna be game on.” A nice way of making a very vague threat of some kind of retaliation, not necessarily physical. I can see the UN telling ISIS to knock off the beheadings or it will be game on. We will send you a sternly-worded rebuke, maybe. Or a vote of censure. Kick your ass? Oh, we didn’t say that.
Mentally “delayed”, which I thought had died out as a really poor idea, but heard on the news last night. These folks are not delayed; delayed means that they’re eventually going to catch up. They’re not; they’re pretty much stuck at whatever developmental stage they’re at. I have a niece who is challenged, and she will be forever making decisions at the level of not-too-bright 10 year old. She’s in her 50s.
While we’re at it, can we get rid of any word or phrase related to “shipping” (as in, the fannish pastime of trying to romantically link any given pair of characters in a TV show, movie, book, etc).
Ship
Shipping
Shipper
That ship has sailed
etc.
The pastime is annoying enough on its own without having a bunch of cutesy terms to describe it.
I admit I’ve only skimmed, but I haven’t seen the word “Trending” and I feel we need to euthanize it. It was a valid and useful word before Twitter(“The xyzw stock has been trending down in the last quarter”) and now it’s just annoying.
Yep, on the face of it, differently-abled is a clunky, inelegant word.
I have a friend who adopted a little boy from China. He was born without a fully-formed right arm - he just has a stump, with a little nubbin on the end.
He can open a jar of peanut butter, brush his teeth, wash his hand, reload his Nerf guns (quickly, too, as I found out during the course of a vigorous Nerf battle) - almost everything a two-handed little boy can do. He is not disabled; he is, in fact, differently-abled. It’s the exact word for his capabilities.
I’ve read through all six pages of this thread, and I can’t believe no one has mentioned “going forward”. Corporate weasel-word for “from now on”: “Going forward, we’re going to comprehensively synergize our value positions and offshore our non-essential resources, to dynamically maximize shareholder value.” Translation: “From now on, your asses are going to be collecting unemployment, 'cuz we’re sending your jobs to a bunch of twelve-year olds in Malaysia who work 15 hour days for two bucks and a handful of wormy rice, so that I can afford the custom walnut trim on my new Lexus.” It sets my teeth on edge. Figuratively.
Another peeve of mine is not a word but a pronunciation, and I’ve been hearing it for some twenty-odd years: dropping the “h” in words that start with “hu-”. It’s not all “hu-” words, just the ones in which the “u” is long, like humor and huge. Human does not rhyme with yew man, Terry Gross, do you hear me?! This must stop, and stop now.
I’m not normally a violent man, but beware if you’re around me when this word is uttered.
Its not that I don’t support progress, its not that I don’t want change, its not even that its a wrong word.
There is a perfectly good and normal word you can use in its place. That word is shorter. That word is correct. That word does not differ so much in meaning/pronunciation/mouth feel/emphasis that this new word needed to be created. Its like if everyone decided to use the word “zamerdiginty” instead of “dignity”. There’s no reason to do it, absolutely none, unless you’re stupid or a dick. Those reasons together are why I do not agree that we need to add a new word to our lexicon
You mean “word”. This utterance is a by-product of ignorance and confusion. People are trying to say regardless but think it’s said “irregardless” because “irrespective” is a synonym and is kind of similar in a vague way.
