I don’t know if this counts, because it involves alternate spellings rather than made-up or misused words, but something that still really grates on me is the gimmicky, simplified spelling of words like through (“thru,”) doughnut (“donut,”) light (“lite,”) etc. But that definitely is something I hate, but have resigned myself to, because even educated people do it and don’t see anything wrong with it.
[ul]
[li]Sando[/li][/ul]
There is no O in sandwich.
Incentivized. Um, motivated?
Along the same lines, we can lament the by-now ubiquitous replacement of “cream” with “creme,” and “grill” with “grille.”
Oh, and other thing I definitely still hate but have resigned myself to is the real-estate industry’s successful complete replacement of the word “house” with “home,” to the extent that they now even have people talking about “townhomes” and “rowhomes.”
“Def”
“Whatev”
“Baby Mama” and “Baby Daddy”
A thing I’ve mentioned before on the Dope – and which is liable to set me at odds with most participants hereon; however – “cromulent”. I know the story of its Simpsons origin: my dislike of it is, likely, informed by my being not much of a fan of The Simpsons. I reckon the series often quite witty and funny: but as to how it has come to be reckoned by countless millions of people, deathless art and a subject for passionate, unlimited devotion and a source of “quotable quotes” to put the Bible and Shakespeare completely in the shade – I just don’t get it.
And “cromulent” – hugely beloved, it seems, throughout the Net community: something about the word and the whole situation, just makes me cringe. In my view, it’s not even as though it fills a gap which was self-evidently there in the language: it’s just a goofy synonym for “valid” – I’m convinced that it would not have caught on, if it hadn’t originated with the bloody Simpsons.
I’m reluctantly resigned that “cromulent” is here to stay; but no way in hell, will I ever use the sodding word.
Don’t forget “forever home”.
Gack.
The word “cover” to refer to a new version of an old song. There’s a difference between a cover and a remake: a cover version is put out at close to the same time as (and usually in competition with) the original.
The next person who says “like” 20 times in a 30-word run-on sentence is going to get pistol-whipped. I hate fillers in general, and I am acutely aware of my own verbal tics, so when I am listening to someone like that it’s almost unbearable. How do those people get any sort of professional job when they speak like 16-year-old girls who never grew up?
I have some sympathy for “orientate”. Sorting out one’s geographical whereabouts is – rightly, per the language specialists – “orientation”; yet – again per those worthies – when one performs that act, one “orients”, not “orientates”, oneself. I can’t help feeling that logically, this does not obviously add up; though it is very much for sure, that linguistic usage and logic often have little to do with each other.
Share meaning tell.
Feel meaning think.
Impact and its variants instead of effect, affect, and their variants.
Podium instead of lectern.
People pronouncing the N in kiln. Yep, the dictionary I had in grade school said it was silent, so there!
[QUOTE=Sangahyando]
And “cromulent” – hugely beloved, it seems, throughout the Net community: something about the word and the whole situation, just makes me cringe. In my view, it’s not even as though it fills a gap which was self-evidently there in the language: it’s just a goofy synonym for “valid” – I’m convinced that it would not have caught on, if it hadn’t originated with the bloody Simpsons.
[/QUOTE]
See, “Cromulent” does not exactly mean “valid” to me; it has a rather distinct meaning, more along the lines of “both valid and appropriate in the manner used.” Whether it will stick I am not sure, though. I have never heard a human being say it aloud, and it may wither away when “The Simpsons” is gone. It would not be acceptable in professional or academic writing.
Being in a large city, we now have many restaurants that call themselves “Gastro pubs,” or “Gastropubs” - there is no agreement on the styling. It’s a dreadful word. “Gastropub” sounds like a parasite of the digestive system, something your doctor would diagnose you as having after sending a sample of your stool to a lab, and then he’d have a burly nurse give you a medicated enema and tell you not to eat sushi from a roadside stand in Tulsa anymore unless you want to get another infestation of gastropubs. It’s not just ugly, it’s pointless. Call it a restaurant, a bar, or a pub. I know what those things are.
Agreed. The correct shorthand form is “sandy”. As in:
“You wanna pea-bo jelly sandy?”
“colorway” when referring to the color of a garment. ie, This blouse comes in a blue colorway. Colorway does not refer to a single item in a single color.
Yes, colorway is a word, but it describes something more akin to a color scheme. Correct usage would be “This blouse comes in a variety of colorways.”
I think people feel that ‘colorway’ is fancier than mere ‘color’, but it grinds my mental gears to hear it used incorrectly so often when speaking of fashion.
The French word crème denotes not only dairy cream, but also other thick liquids such as sweet and savory custards, which are normally made with milk, not cream.
Can I get you an aspirin? 
So many annoying words. Where to start?
“Vape”. :rolleyes:
Nope, it’s “sammy,” as in short for “sammich.”
Let my friend, here, say it for me–I, I just can’t:
“Podium instead of lectern” is sheer pedantry, which is exactly why I VIGOROUSLY AND LOUDLY DEMAND THE PROPER USAGE OF “LECTERN” ON EVERY OCCASION, AND THEY, WHETHER THEY WILL HEAR, OR WHETHER THEY WILL FOREBEAR…YET SHALL KNOW THAT THERE HATH BEEN A PROPHET AMONG THEM!