Peeves! Get'cher Peeves Here!

[gnomi]

As a follow-up to yesterday's discussion, I began to wonder what folks' grammar error pet peeves are. Here are some of mine:

-- Its/it's

-- Fewer/less

-- That/which

-- Their/they're/there

-- Your/you're

I'd love to hear other folks', if you all (or y'all) are in a mood to share.

Comments

[cbpotts.livejournal.com]

Poor/Pore/Pour

[xochitl42.livejournal.com]

Here's mine: Impact is NOT a verb.

Impactful isn't a word AT ALL.

[fynixsoul.livejournal.com]

Oh man, I saw that word in a phamplet for the Chicago CTA once. They were talking about their plan to keep the trains running during construction, and claimed that "The Three-Track Plan is the least impactful."

[zsero.livejournal.com]

One would hope. It's good that they were thinking of how to avoid impacts.

[cellio]

Can we dialogue about that? :-(

I don't know when widespread verbing of nouns where perfectly good verbs already existed began, but this particular one afflicts me at work frequently. You'd think that people who won't buy a correctness argument would at least buy an efficieny one ("talk" is one syllable rather than three), but no...

[jourdanlane.livejournal.com]

Then/than

[byrne.livejournal.com]

awhile/a while
further/farther

[magid.livejournal.com]

Orientate.

And it annoys me that burglarize is English; burgle is an excellent verb.

Not that either of those are the homonym issue.

Oh, and my dad, in addition to having drummed the difference between fewer and less into me, insists that it is "skimmed milk." Which I suppose is technically correct, but still sounds wrong to me, even though that other beverage is definitely "iced tea," not "ice tea."

[zsero.livejournal.com]

"Burgle" is not an excellent verb; it's a back-formation from "burglar" by people who don't know that the word is "burglarise". If "burgle" were a verb, then a person who did it would be a "burgler", not a "burglar".

[tsuki-no-bara.livejournal.com]

its/it's and the general misuse of apostrophes in plural words.

[tsuki-no-bara.livejournal.com]

also taut/taunt, which is a weird mistake to make, but when it happens in a fic it's every single instance of the word, so it's not as if the writer just made a single typo. they just don't know what they're talking about.

[madfilkentist]

Loose and lose.

[dpolicar]

Thinking over our conversation from this morning, I'd say mine fall in the following categories, provided in roughly descending order of peevishness:

1) Using words you don't normally use, improperly, in a failed attempt to sound smart.
"Infer/imply" is often in this category, as is "compose/comprise" (yes, I know that one is increasingly going the way of "momentarily/briefly," but I'm still holding the line on it), as are a wide range of cases of simply using words that don't mean anything the speaker might plausibly want to say. (Combining these, I once heard someone say "compromises" instead of "comprises" when they actually meant "composes." Sigh.)

2) Misusing words that are common enough that for the love of God you should have learned to use them properly by now.
"It's/its", "they're/their/there", "your/you're", and many other variations on a theme fall in this category. "That/which" doesn't, though... and yes, I realize that's a subjective line. "Fewer/less" straddles it.

3) Errors that actually change the meaning of what you're saying.

Misplaced modifiers top this list, though I sometimes cut them slack when they're funny. ("She later regretted having chased after the boy in a miniskirt.")

4) Other errors in formal/technical writing

5) Other errors in informal/casual writing

6) Other errors in speech.

7) Mispronouncing words. (Especially low on my peeve-scale is mispronouncing "pedant", which always makes me laugh and I've been known to do deliberately.)

[tru2myart.livejournal.com]

too/to/two
bazaar/bizarre
effect/affect
cite/sight/site
close/clothes
ensure/insure
good/well
quite/quiet
their/they're/there

[eafm.livejournal.com]

For me it depends on the context. In a published piece, most of what's been listed so far will make me flinch. Here on LJ, though, I can overlook almost anything, because I know how often I've rushed through a post only to reread it the next day and be horrified by the typos and bizarre substitutions (as if my brain sent the wrong macro down to my fingers: "brother" instead of "both, for example). Oh, or by those sentences I obviously cut and pasted together from multiple grammatically-incompatible sentences, forgetting to smooth out the inconsistencies when I was done.

Two that drive me insane no matter where I find them, though, are "different than" and the use of "and I" when "and me" would have been correct. I can overlook the misuse of "me" much more easily than the misuse of "I". It is possible for a misplaced "me" to sound intentionally casual, as if I'm reading a prose poem in which the priority is the flow and rhythm of the words instead of clarity or grammar. But an incorrect "I" always manages to come across as an attempt to sound hyperintellectual. Scan/skim also drives me up a wall, but that's really more vocabulary than grammar, isn't it?

[eal.livejournal.com]

Plural vs. possessive
its/it's
cite/site
loose/lose

[chaos-wrangler.livejournal.com]

may/might - I've been seeing/hearing this one more and more recently, including in published books and on the news. This one really bothers me when used about past events, e.g. "X may have happened if Y hadn't happened", since the first part has me thinking that X might have actually happened, when in fact the speaker already knows (and is trying to say) that it didn't.

[michelel72.livejournal.com]

Dude, sportscasters are the worst about this! I adore the television commentators for the Red Sox, but if I hear either of them say (for example) if he was holding the runner on he may have caught that about one more time ....

[janedavitt.livejournal.com]

It/it's has to be the worst because it's such a simple rule and it throws me right out of a story and makes me distrust the author.

[janedavitt.livejournal.com]

That typo was deliberate. Ahem.

Its/it's, I mean.

[yin-again.livejournal.com]

I despize buzzwords - proactive and that ilk. I heard a new one the other day: monetize. Apparently it means "to make something profitable," or something similar. I think that what I yelled at the paper was something along the lines of "You have got to be fucking kidding me!".

I also despise the Random use of Capital letters For emphasis. I had to pull about a thousand of them out of a 50 page document I was proofing - in hardcopy.

[zsero.livejournal.com]

"Monetise" (or "-ze") is a real word. It means to make something money. As in what the proverbial prisoners do to cigarettes.

I think it's also sometimes used for "put a dollar amount on something of value", generally something that it would be impractical to actually sell for that or any other amount.

[yin-again.livejournal.com]

These people were talking about telecommunications services. So, real word, bad usage. They were talking about using a certain technology to "monetize" their services.

I love the prison reference. I think we should all start more sentences with "In prison..."

Also, "to make something money" made me think of Vince Vaughn.

[zsero.livejournal.com]

"Could care less" for "couldn't..."

"Refute", for "rebut" or plain "deny".

"Web cite" or "sight", for "site".

[fynixsoul.livejournal.com]

My biggest language peeves lately come from my job at the inner city daycare. Now, a lot of the annoyances I felt could be put down to dialect (like dropping the word "of"--i.e. "get out the cubbies!" telling the kids to remove themselves from the cubby area, rather than to take the cubbies out of where ever they are.)

But the two things I couldn't let go:

1. Using "pee" as a transitive very (at least, I think that's what happened.) As in, "We have to pee the kids before taking them outside."

2. My boss always said "ideal" instead of "idea." As in, "Let me come up with some ideals and suggestions and get back to you." I don't think it was just an accent, because her speech was otherwise flawless. Now, granted, she could have actually meant "ideal," but that would've been a really weird thing to say. Perhaps not knowing for sure is what bugs me the most.

[michelel72.livejournal.com]

Omitting ones I've seen here or in the other discussion, for the sake of brevity ...
- breath/breathe
- alright
- envelop/envelope
- gender when sex is meant
- Singular subjects (especially the user in software documentation) given plural pronouns (they, their)
- hippy in place of hippie when referring to a person
- Mismatch of spelling and gender -- a male fiancée, a blonde man, a female fiancé, a blond woman. (But brunet is probably dead.)
- Unparallel sentence structure
- Ending a word with an apostrophe when the word is not a plural ending in s (such as Mr. Hicks' or Red Sox')
- The woman who today confidently told the guy across from me that to quote a question, he should use a quotation and a close-quote and then a period

[zsero.livejournal.com]

gender when sex is meant

I've started using this one myself, especially when I'm already using "sex" in the same sentence to mean "doing it". Using a word in two different senses in the same sentence: Bad Idea.

Singular subjects (especially the user in software documentation) given plural pronouns (they, their)

This is correct English, and has been for centuries.

[michelel72.livejournal.com]

I've started using this one myself, especially when I'm already using "sex" in the same sentence to mean "doing it". Using a word in two different senses in the same sentence: Bad Idea.
That's one busy sentence! (Heh.) This is a peeve I know I'm on the losing side of for the simple reason that your typical middle-America soccer mom can't bring herself to use the word sex in conversation, preferring to employ gender as its genteel synonym, and the editors of her newspapers cater to that choice. Yet, still a peeve. There are useful distinctions these words can still make, particularly in discussions of gender identity; I hate to lose those distinctions without a good reason.

Re they paired with a singular antecedent: This is correct English, and has been for centuries.
This puzzles me a bit; that's not accurate of any style guide I've used. Are you by any chance British? Garner indicates that "the indeterminate they" is more commonly accepted and even "more or less standard" in British English. (I do disagree with Garner on a few points, but I generally find his judgment sensible.) He discusses the matter from several different angles in his entries on concord, sexism and pronouns. The subject also inspired a usage note in American Heritage ... oh, wow, looks like there's a POV/NPOV/accuracy war about it over at Wikipedia, too. Bleah. I'll stick with the traditionalists on this one. (After years of letting just anyone create user documentation without guidelines, my company has finally decided to avoid this question entirely by converting everything into the imperative and the second person.)

[violetcheetah.livejournal.com]

How could you forget "preventative"?

Also, in your last point, I think you meant "he should use a question mark and a close-quote and then a period."

[michelel72.livejournal.com]

I knew I'd leave something out!

- latter used to refer to one of more than two enumerated options

[zsero.livejournal.com]

flout/flaunt. You may flaunt the fact that you flout the rules of grammar, but at least keep track of which is which.

lectern/podium (that misuse appeared in the debate between Hillary Clinton and Rick Lazio).

[sharonaf.livejournal.com]

The use of 'so' without a 'that' in written English. I can take it in spoken English, and even use it occasionally, but when I read, "We are SO proud of our students," without a "that we're going to take them all out for ice cream!" following it, I just have to get out the red pen...
I just hate it SO much. ;-)

[janetmiles.livejournal.com]

I didn't know that one! Thank you.

(I'm here randomly, via tigerbright's friendslist.)

[sharonaf.livejournal.com]

Any time. ;-)

[willa-writes.livejournal.com]

I'm humbling myself because I don't personally know the difference in the following. It's information I need to know -- I'd be grateful for the clarification.

Fewer/less
That/which

[willa-writes.livejournal.com]

I forgot one.

Imply/infer

Thanks :-)

[michelel72.livejournal.com]

Some quick contrasts, in the hope they're any help:

Fewer/less: Fewer is used for items that are counted individually, while less is used for items that are measured as a mass. Now that he has less hair [an undifferentiated mass], he leaves fewer hairs [individual items] in the sink. You might buy less sugar this week or fewer bags of sugar. Moving into more abstract terms, one might become less confident if one receives fewer positive reviews.

Imply/infer: In a conversation, the speaker implies and the listener infers. My carefully chosen words might imply that she is rude, or you might infer from my comments that she is rude.

That/which: I'm guessing this has to do with restrictive and nonrestrictive phrases. The pencil that has cows on it is mine implies (!) that there are multiple pencils and I specifically care about the one with the bovine theme. The pen, which is blue, is mine implies that there is only one pen; it happens to be blue, but I could omit that detail without affecting the meaning of the sentence.

I don't run into that/which often enough to be peeved by it, but I don't edit professionally. I don't have the nerves for it!

[willa-writes.livejournal.com]

Thank you! The information provided is very helpful and may perhaps prevent future editors from cursing my unborn children (less often). :-)

[42itous.livejournal.com]

Misplaced or missing apostrophes; also, quotation marks for emphasis.

[(Anonymous)]

Lend/loan

Why do people use "loan" as a verb?

"Loan" is a noun. "Lend" is the verb to use.


STEVE O.

[jencallisto]

It's funny, most of these will bother me a bit, but I've become more generous about mistakes in most formats (except those materials that have been formally published), so in email and livejournal I will often give someone the benefit of the doubt unless they do it pretty much all the time. But mostly I will just assume that they usually know better but committed a typo in the moment. The only one I would currently call a true peeve is that/which, because so many people (read: historians) who ought to know better don't seem to. And then other people end up quoting them, so even if they know better, they're stuck with the source material's mistake. And it's not quite something as simple as your/you're, which I'd feel perfectly comfortable either correcting or putting sic after...

[neverbeen2spain.livejournal.com]

Bring/take and actually most of yours too.

[ephemera.livejournal.com]

This is interlock after a name change : please re-add me to your flist?

[vettecat.livejournal.com]

Stationery/stationary :-)

[(Anonymous)]

Using the noun "loan" as a verb--one should use "lend" instead.


STEVE O.