Another vote for nice, but when it’s used as a synonym for impressive, and especially when its pronounced “noice”.
Illegitimate, when specifically used regarding people. Usually the only ones who say this are judging another person. It drives me batty.
The complaint about “pleaded” above is exactly the reverse for me. In Commonwealth jurisdictions (subject to what Canadians may say) “pled” is treated as an outré Americanism, although it is seen from time to time. It is in the same family of Americanisms as dispensing with definite and indefinite articles (“Plaintiff sues Defendant in tort for negligence.” is a perfectly cromulent sentence in American jurisprudence, and perfectly odd to my ears.)
Similar oddities are the overuse of gerunds like “holding” and “showing”: “A holding in favor of plaintiff requires a showing of the following facts…”
Can’t say I actually hate these things, but their jarring quality interrupts my reading.
I hate when people type “do to” when they should type “due to”. For some reason it bothers me more than other misspellings/word confusions.
I also hate it when another woman calls me “sister”. This is probably because my boss does this, and she’s a super bitch.
Incubus, Alice The Goon, Onomatopoeia and all who dislike the use of the rather shallow adjective nice, may rest easier if you think of this and this upon hearing it.
Me, I cringe when I see or hear someone use would of instead of would have :smack:.
And for all of the fans of the English language, I present a rather long interpretation from a dead French guy;
Dearest creature in creation, Study English pronunciation.
I will teach you in my verse
Sounds like corpse, corps, horse, and worse.
I will keep you, Suzy, busy,
Make your head with heat grow dizzy.
Tear in eye, your dress will tear.
So shall I! Oh hear my prayer.
Just compare heart, beard, and heard,
Dies and diet, lord and word,
Sword and sward, retain and Britain.
(Mind the latter, how it’s written.)
Now I surely will not plague you
With such words as plaque and ague.
But be careful how you speak:
Say break and steak, but bleak and streak;
Cloven, oven, how and low,
Script, receipt, show, poem, and toe.
Hear me say, devoid of trickery,
Daughter, laughter, and Terpsichore,
Typhoid, measles, topsails, aisles,
Exiles, similes, and reviles;
Scholar, vicar, and cigar,
Solar, mica, war and far;
One, anemone, Balmoral,
Kitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel;
Gertrude, German, wind and mind,
Scene, Melpomene, mankind.
Billet does not rhyme with ballet,
Bouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet.
Blood and flood are not like food,
Nor is mould like should and would.
Viscous, viscount, load and broad,
Toward, to forward, to reward.
And your pronunciation’s OK
When you correctly say croquet,
Rounded, wounded, grieve and sieve,
Friend and fiend, alive and live.
Ivy, privy, famous; clamour
And enamour rhyme with hammer.
River, rival, tomb, bomb, comb,
Doll and roll and some and home.
Stranger does not rhyme with anger,
Neither does devour with clangour.
Souls but foul, haunt but aunt,
Font, front, wont, want, grand, and grant,
Shoes, goes, does. Now first say finger,
And then singer, ginger, linger,
Real, zeal, mauve, gauze, gouge and gauge,
Marriage, foliage, mirage, and age.
Query does not rhyme with very,
Nor does fury sound like bury.
Dost, lost, post and doth, cloth, loth.
Job, nob, bosom, transom, oath.
Though the differences seem little,
We say actual but victual.
Refer does not rhyme with deafer.
Fe0ffer does, and zephyr, heifer.
Mint, pint, senate and sedate;
Dull, bull, and George ate late.
Scenic, Arabic, Pacific,
Science, conscience, scientific.
Liberty, library, heave and heaven,
Rachel, ache, moustache, eleven.
We say hallowed, but allowed,
People, leopard, towed, but vowed.
Mark the differences, moreover,
Between mover, cover, clover;
Leeches, breeches, wise, precise,
Chalice, but police and lice;
Camel, constable, unstable,
Principle, disciple, label.
Petal, panel, and canal,
Wait, surprise, plait, promise, pal.
Worm and storm, chaise, chaos, chair,
Senator, spectator, mayor.
Tour, but our and succour, four.
Gas, alas, and Arkansas.
Sea, idea, Korea, area,
Psalm, Maria, but malaria.
Youth, south, southern, cleanse and clean.
Doctrine, turpentine, marine.
Compare alien with Italian,
Dandelion and battalion.
Sally with ally, yea, ye,
Eye, I, ay, aye, whey, and key.
Say aver, but ever, fever,
Neither, leisure, skein, deceiver.
Heron, granary, canary.
Crevice and device and aerie.
Face, but preface, not efface.
Phlegm, phlegmatic, ass, glass, bass.
Large, but target, gin, give, verging,
Ought, out, joust and scour, scourging.
Ear, but earn and wear and tear
Do not rhyme with here but ere.
Seven is right, but so is even,
Hyphen, roughen, nephew Stephen,
Monkey, donkey, Turk and jerk,
Ask, grasp, wasp, and cork and work.
Pronunciation (think of Psyche!)
Is a paling stout and spikey?
Won’t it make you lose your wits,
Writing groats and saying grits?
It’s a dark abyss or tunnel:
Strewn with stones, stowed, solace, gunwale,
Islington and Isle of Wight,
Housewife, verdict and indict.
Finally, which rhymes with enough,
Though, through, plough, or dough, or cough?
Hiccough has the sound of cup.
My advice is to [not] give up!!!
-The Chaos, by G. Nolst Trenite, aka Charivarius (1870-1946)
Nice.
Thusly.
That’s just freakin’ wrong you idiot.
Moist.
Never OK. Never.
So I guess the using the phrase “moist panties” is right out, then?
And what will we use to describe a towelette?!
Indeed. I had this drilled in to me by my English teacher when I was about twelve. She said that simply saying “nice” gives no other information and is too vague about the feeling it inspires. It is close to being a non-word.
Personally I hate “burglarize”. Use “burgle”.
“Nom” and “delish” when referring to food.
Can I have your children?
(this is perhaps my biggest pet peeve related to language. I’m sure it’s partly because a former workplace overused that word to a ridiculous extent. Whenever it’s not used appropriately, I take it out of documents at work whenever I can.)
Albeit.
It gives me the woozies.
It’s a legitimate word, I know.
I still don’t want you using it. 
mmm
ETA: In looking it up, I just learned there is also a ‘howbeit’.
Crap!
There’s a place for this, really. I use a coffee cup to drink coffee. But I utilize it to hold (unshelled) eggs whilst awaiting the pan to heat.
The normal use isn’t to hold unshelled eggs. It’s probable and likely that both use and utilize are listed as synonyms in these modern times, but (ir)regardless of that, modern usage/utilization has kind of made them synonyms. Note: I’m against that; I prefer to distinguish as in my example, because specificity is just as important as understanding.
Really? But are you saying there’s an objective stylistic problem with it or is it your personal dislike? I mean, I can understand your example where it was used multiple times, but would you edit it when used once?
For example, I’ve recently had to turn down a request in an formal way and I wrote “Due to organisational issues, we are unable to fulfill your requirements”. Now, to me “due to” sounds better here than “because of”. Would you have advised me otherwise? I’m sincerely curious.
This is nonsense. You don’t utilize it when you do that, you leverage its eggapacity.
That board right there? That there’s a 3 foot two-by-four if I ever done saw one.
Meme. I have nothing against the concept. I just can’t stand how the word sounds. No real reason for it.
See post #59 for the stylistic issue.
When used correctly, I will sign a report using due to. However, the reports that I review are written in a database with limited characters and already have a heading for things like the root cause and corrective action. Due to is redundant in all cases. If nothing else, it hogs up characters that could be giving a better description of the problem.
I also have to agree with those who said utilize. When every I here someone say utilize I immediately think “use”.
Of course I do like woody words. Hate tinny.