Thread: English Pet Peeves & Common Mistakes

Ha, that song has taken quite a bit of heat. People say that in actuality, she doesn't describe anything ironic, which intrinsically, is ironic However, I'd contend that a fly in your Chardonnay is ironic. But rain on your wedding day; that's just unfortunate.

From King of Queens
Jerry Stiller(Arthur Spooner): "Douglass, you were right, I thought ironic meant made completely of iron" hehe.

"The ironing is delicious."

Originally Posted by rockzmom

My daughter's English teacher uses the song Ironic by Alanis Morissette when she teaches her class about irony...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v9yUVgrmPY

Has she ever been engaged in a movie or TV series? I think I saw her somewhere in that capacity. She looks so familiar.
Does the English teacher refer to the song as an exemplary “don’t do that in a public place and especially when children are present” thingy?
Personally, the song’s lyrics struck me as particularly understandable, unlike so many others. And is there really something wrong with the ironic there? Isn’t it an irony of fate for an old man to die having just won the lottery?

Originally Posted by rockzmom

My daughter's English teacher uses the song Ironic by Alanis Morissette when she teaches her class about irony...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v9yUVgrmPY

Ed Byrne's take on the song

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nT1TVSTkAXg

It might have been funny if the song were bad, but it isn’t. The song is nice and the prick thrashing Alanis Morissette reminds me of our Comedy Club’s patron Павел Воля – as equally a sh*t-face of titanic proportion.

Originally Posted by alexB

It might have been funny if the song were bad, but it isn’t. The song is nice and the prick thrashing Alanis Morissette reminds me of our Comedy Club’s patron Павел Воля – as equally a sh*t-face of titanic proportion.

thank you for your opinion

Another one --

"For all intensive purposes". The phrase is actually "for all intents and purposes", but the former version is heard rather frequently.

Okay... my mom wants help with this one.... Robin... it sounds as if you might know the answer???

Someone wrote to her and stated:
"I'm guessing that your focus on the ZNH festival in Eatonville, FL (which while it is not -- as it turns out -- her birthplace, it is her place of birth!)"

My mom wrote to me stating: I don't understand the difference between her birthplace and her place of birth ...

ANYONE??? even if it's not Robin

To me there's no difference, but there's a paragraph here which implies that there are countries where there is one.

Robin

Originally Posted by rockzmom

Okay... my mom wants help with this one.... Robin... it sounds as if you might know the answer???

Someone wrote to her and stated:
"I'm guessing that your focus on the ZNH festival in Eatonville, FL (which while it is not -- as it turns out -- her birthplace, it is her place of birth!)"

[quote:zj16m5xh]My mom wrote to me stating: I don't understand the difference between her birthplace and her place of birth ...

ANYONE??? even if it's not Robin [/quote:zj16m5xh]


There is absolutely no difference, unless the meaning of "place of birth" here is metaphorical. You didn't provide context of the sentence, but "festival" could imply "creative" birth. This depends on context. In this case, birthplace (where one is born biologically) would be contrasted with place where one is born as an artist / reborn as Jehova's witness / whatever form of metaphorical birth.

The wikipedia link to "place of birth" redirects from "birthplace" (i.e. they are identical). Webster's defines "birthplace" AS "place of birth"

"...about 8 percent of our military forces are comprised of women."

Isn't, by any chance, "be comprised of" anybody's pet peeve? There are people who vehemently disagree with such (common) usage of "comprise", but they may be just "evil linguists-prescriptivists", for all I know.

Originally Posted by E-learner

"...about 8 percent of our military forces are comprised of women."

Isn't, by any chance, "be comprised of" anybody's pet peeve? There are people who vehemently disagree with such (common) usage of "comprise", but they may be just "evil linguists-prescriptivists", for all I know.

it's a dry, official sounding phrase; I wouldn't call it a pet peeve though.

Here's one which may not have been mentioned before, which I just came across again: Writing "without much adieu" instead of "without much ado".

Originally Posted by fortheether

When people use "ax" instead of "ask".

Scott

Scott... I was rolling and thinking of you when I heard this one last night!!
The entire monologue is one of the best on SNL in a long time but the part that is for this thread is starts at the 2:03 mark

My pet peeve is having my computer underline the word "outwith" or, worse still, having someone wrongly correct me when I use it.

It's a perfectly nice little preposition that doesn't have a direct synonym but does have an uncontroversial antonym, it can be found in the Collins, Cambridge, Oxford, Merriam-Webster dictionaries, it is used in the legal systems of several countries, it is recorded in Hansard (official transcripts of debates in the UK Houses of Parliament) on countless occasions, and yet many people and most spell-checkers refuse to acknowledge its existence as a word.

"What it is, is..."

As in: "Ma'am, what the problem with your engine is, is the starter's busted."

Non-US people would probably never make this one. But it's rampant in Arizona. And cringeworthy. =)

I'll donate my old English teachers personal favorite, "and also." As in, this is an annoying habit, and also not very logical. And and also are duplicative. Pick one she would shout (literally, it's quite a vivid memory) She was also driven crazy by double negatives in a sentence (which Russian allows). "I haven't never owed nothing to no one" Remember kids in English, as in math two negative equal a positive.

Originally Posted by sarah37

by double negatives in a sentence (which Russian allows). "I haven't never owed nothing to no one" Remember kids in English, as in math two negative equal a positive.

'I haven't ever owed anything to anyone' means "Я никогда никому ничего не был должен". And there's only one negative word: не. It's the only negative word in Russian. Things like ничего, никто, никому etc. are not negative; they act as negative words, so to say. At the same time they never go without the не in a sentence. You may say how about cases like this: - Что ты здесь делаешь? - Ничего. - What are you doing here? - Nothing. There's no single не in the answer. There's actually is one, but it's omitted. The full sentence is 'Я ничего здесь не делаю'. A double negative occurs when two не are used: Я не мог не показать ему, как он выглядит в зеркале. I couldn't help showing him his reflection in the mirror. Maybe there are some other cases when a double negative occurs, but I can't remember them.

"I haven't never owed nothing to no one"

Does this sentence mean something sensible? (Am I correct saying that?) If yes, I'm curious to know what it is.

Remember kids in English, as in math two negative equal a positive.

So it does in Russian.

So i and my friends were chatting yesterday in G.Ch. and we faced this grammatical issue, however we kinda pass it by a semi-misinterpretation.
So i think it does worth a little time to check these links for anyone who is anxious to know. [ and specially iCake (Who's about to become a professional English speaker) and Medved ! ]

- http://www.grammarerrors.com/grammar/arent-iam-i-not/
- http://josecarilloforum.com/forum/in...ic=5041.0;wap2

Also any comment on it would be appreciated!

Originally Posted by MISSFOXYSWEETCHERRY

So i and my friends were chatting yesterday in G.Ch. and we faced this grammatical issue, however we kinda pass it by a semi-misinterpretation.
So i think it does worth a little time to check these links for anyone who is anxious to know. [ and specially iCake (Who's about to become a professional English speaker) and Medved ! ]

- aren’t I/am I not
- Which is correct " am I not/ain't I" or "aren't I"?

Also any comment on it would be appreciated!

I can suggest a little trick.

The one web page implies this idea, though. Just switch the two words at the beginning of the question/phrase (i.e. the contracted interrogative fragment) and if it makes sense, then it's correct form or usage.

E.g. I’m going with you on vacation, am I not? (so do the switch: "I am not" - *I am). Therefore, it's correct.

English speakers are always trying to make shortcuts in speech and although, it's an attempt at efficiency (to say the same thing in less words), it is often considered incorrect grammar. People are also using slang and eventually get into bad habits and form. But, it sounds 'better' ('difficult to explain).