Here are a few of the most common mistakes I see when I read other peoples' writing, whether it be on the Internet, or via e-mail, or in magazines or even books. And often it even shows up in the words they say, where I find it especially hard not to correct them.
1) Is it really that hard to understand the difference between infer and imply? Is this just a mental block sort of thing, as it seems to afflict some reasonably intelligent folks? I've taken to using the sentence, "Am I correctly inferring what you're implying?" when I hear either word used wrong (always as the other), because at least it gives the other person an example of how they're meant to be used. And I don't mean this in an elitist way; I just don't understand why people find them so confusing.
2) There's no such word as irregardless! (Oh, sure, one of these days it'll end up in the dictionary, because enough chowderheads will be using it that it'll become legitimate through common use!) If it was a word, then wouldn't it mean "with regard to" or "regarding", since it's a double negative?! I suppose the real culprits are words like irrelevant and irresponsible, because somehow, by simply existing, they've convinced people that you just stick an "ir" at the start of any "r" word to negate it. This one, I'll admit, really makes me teeth hurt when I see or hear it.
3) The possessive form of it has no apostrophe. I know that's an exception, and that most possessive forms do have apostophes, but the English language is nothing if not filled with exceptions, so get over it! A good sentence for this one is "It's a naughty dog that licks its balls in public" although I guess it's maybe not suitable for all audiences...
4) This one's a little harder to characterize, but here's an example of it: "The Blue Jays have more pitching depth in their farm system than the entire American League East." Now, regardless of whether or not you agree with the sentiment (I don't), the logic of the sentence makes no sense. The Jays are part of the American League East! So how could they have more of anything than any group that includes them? Clearly what the writer or speaker meant to say was "The Blue Jays have more ... than the rest of the American League East combined." That sentence, while still likely untrue, at least could be true! Another type of example would be a sentence like "No player has ever exhibited the scoring touch of Wayne Gretzky", where they really mean "No other player has ever..." I see this sort of thing way too often, let me tell you!
On a therapeutic scale of 1 to 10, this blog entry scored a solid:
7.0 !
I feel better already.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Along similar lines as number four, I'm annoyed by "this is the most [x] since...". Half the time a person using this phrase means this occurrence is the most [x] ever, and the other half they mean that the previous amount of [x] was higher. The same goes for almost any superlative.
Using "and" in place of "to"—"I'm going to go upstairs and play video games"—is up there as well.
It's a naughty dog that licks its balls in public....ah now I get it!
Post a Comment