Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories

Vanilla 1.1.8 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
    • CommentAuthorSlyShy
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2009
     
    • CommentAuthorGolcondio
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2009
     
    Wonderful, I always love when I'm proved right (had a few discussions with my friends about some of the solecisms mentioned)!

    Anyway, they forgot to point out that
    ALAS doesn't mean "regrettably" anymore, but instead should be read as "finally". Talk about evolution, huh?
  1.  

    I resemble the remark about ‘among and between’

  2.  

    Wow, I can’t believe that I knew all of these.

    I must be a genius.

    •  
      CommentAuthorRand
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2009
     
    Well, its more a phrase, but when people say 'For all intensive purposes' when they really mean 'For all intents and purposes'. That just bothers me.
  3.  

    People say “intensive purposes”? Wha..?

    Then again, someone on Yahoo! Answers thought that “insure yourself” was part of the lyrics to an MGMT song. Yahoo! Answers being what it is, though…

    •  
      CommentAuthorMoldorm
    • CommentTimeJun 2nd 2009
     

    They missed “literally”, now infuriatingly used to add emphasis (“I literally died!”, “He literally exploded!”).

    •  
      CommentAuthorJeni
    • CommentTimeJun 2nd 2009
     

    ALAS doesn’t mean “regrettably” anymore, but instead should be read as “finally”. Talk about evolution, huh?

    I have never heard “alas” used in context to mean “finally”. :/

    And good reference page. I’m surprised they don’t have affect/effect, that’s usually a very common one.

    • CommentAuthorSlyShy
    • CommentTimeJun 2nd 2009
     

    They missed “literally”, now infuriatingly used to add emphasis (“I literally died!”, “He literally exploded!”).

    I hate this. Those people literally mean ‘figuratively’.

  4.  

    Exactament. Thanks for that, I needed to hear it, especially today. rolls eyes snobbishly

  5.  

    Eek, sorry, just re-read that post, and I just wanted to let you know, that I was being serious. Believe me, no scathing remark intended. ;)

    • CommentAuthorGolcondio
    • CommentTimeJun 3rd 2009
     
    Hey Jeni, you should read more of Kenneth Eng's works: he's doing wondrous and unimaginable things to English language...
  6.  

    ...not to mention reinventing physics…

    •  
      CommentAuthorJeni
    • CommentTimeJun 3rd 2009
     

    Hey Jeni, you should read more of Kenneth Eng’s works: he’s doing wondrous and unimaginable things to English language…

    D:

    ;_;

    You win.

    • CommentAuthorSlyShy
    • CommentTimeJun 3rd 2009
     

    Kenneth Eng’s use of ‘alas’ is a comedy all by itself.

  7.  
    I don't want to remember back that far, so I think I'll just live with not getting the joke.
    • CommentAuthorGolcondio
    • CommentTimeJun 3rd 2009
     
    Yeah, Drunk Fox's and Nate's sporks are SO last month!

    BTW, what is the correct expression for when you use the saxon genitive but have more than one subject? I don't think my sentence was wrong, but it doesn't ring right...
  8.  

    Albeit we have a shortage of sporks in the present, sporks that were in the past written are, alas, plentiful.

    •  
      CommentAuthorArtimaeus
    • CommentTimeJun 3rd 2009 edited
     

    Misuse of the word “decimate” has always been my pet peeve. To decimate means to kill 1 out of every 10. While 10% suffering casualties isn’t anything to sneeze at, a lot of writers use “decimate” to describe much more crushing defeats.

    “Open fire,” the came the commander’s harsh whisper over the radio, and the ambush was sprung. On the ridge of the valley, forty fingers pressed forty triggers on forty machine guns, and their bullet shredded the air, decimating the enemy soldiers in the valley. When the machine guns finally whirred to a halt, there was nothing left to shoot. The few soldiers that had not yet entered the valley were trying to regroup outside the range of the squad’s guns, but their numbers were too small to…

    There are other words you can use, damnit! Like “devastated” or “crushed” or “massacred”. [/RAGE]

    •  
      CommentAuthorRand
    • CommentTimeJun 3rd 2009
     
    How about 'I literally could of died'? Awful stuff.
    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeJun 3rd 2009
     

    literally dies from reading Rand’s sentence

    cough Anyway. Yeah, the decimate thing annoys me too. I was most pleased when it was used correctly in the Season 3 Doctor Who finale.

    •  
      CommentAuthorMoldorm
    • CommentTimeJun 4th 2009
     

    Yes, that was very pleasing.
    It couldn’t make up for all the plot holes and continuity errors, though. That last episode annoys me so much…

  9.  

    Continuity? Doctor Who?

    Really, now.

  10.  
    Ah, solecisms. The stuff of which new definitions are made?

    @ Artimaeus
    Someday I'd like to read in a novel:

    "Commander, we managed to wipe out the enemy, but our troops were decimated!"
    "Excellent!"

    and have it mean what I think it should mean.
    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeJun 10th 2009
     
    @SSD - I'll be sure to write that into a novel when I'm rich and famous. *thumbs nose at everyone else* Don't worry, I'll send you advance copies so your sporkings can go up the day the book releases.