You are MURDERING the King's English!!

anyways

Irregardless is a good example of what I'm talking about; as a commercial for MTV so rightly points out, the word does appear in some earlier manuscripts; originally a "non-word," yes, but recognized..

NOO-CUE-LAR is now an "accepted" alternative pronunciation for nuclear in some dictionaries.

anonym wrote:

Irregardless is a good example of what I'm talking about; as a commercial for MTV so rightly points out, the word does appear in some earlier manuscripts; originally a "non-word," yes, but recognized..

NOO-CUE-LAR is now an "accepted" alternative pronunciation for nuclear in some dictionaries.

Which ones?

correction wrote:

I'm pretty sure I'm right. It sounds normal because you hear it so often, but it is not grammatically correct. It should be "someone dropped his* keys..."

*or, in these days of political correctness "his or her"

This person is definitely correct. "Someone dropped their keys" is wrong.

And just as a sidenote, I'd like to thank the original poster for caring about this as well. Granted, when people are speaking, emailing, or typing on a message board, I don't care much about their grammar or spelling, but I am continually appalled at how many people in professional settings don't bother to get things right! Yes, I know they've done studies to show that spelling ability doesn't correlate with intelligence or whatnot, but to me, reading a paper or website full of spelling and grammatical errors indicates that the source is either lazy or apathetic, which to me lowers credibility. I mean, even if this kind of thing isn't your strength, you should try to give a damn, in the same way that you would dress nicely for a job interview even if you normally wear jeans and a t-shirt.

The one that butgs me the most is when people say,

"I says" instead of I said or

"We was" instead of we were.

Drives me freakin insane. Everyone here in Idaho does it.

anything that comes out of a Boston local sounds like shit spewing.

anonym wrote:

Irregardless is a good example of what I'm talking about; as a commercial for MTV so rightly points out, the word does appear in some earlier manuscripts; originally a "non-word," yes, but recognized..

Ah yes, MTV. The last bastion of the proper usage of the English language. A mighty authority, indeed.

BTW, I recognize what the speaker means when he says "nuculer". I also recognize that he's incorrect. I understand the concept of a living language, but some of this borders on the redikulus.

Alternative pronunciations for nuclear found on mirriam webster online:

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=nuclear

Irregardless, of course, is in the OED. MTV knows THERE stuff!

These tidbits illustrate a coupla points:

1. Be careful when you say something is/isn't in "the dictionary," cuz, of course, there's more than one.

2. Language has no "correct" existence.

haha it's "ridiculous", not "redikulus" you moron!!

DTG wrote:

This person is definitely correct. "Someone dropped their keys" is wrong.

According to my dictionary, and common usage, "they" may be used in the manner wot I did, except in the most formal usage.

And my essay teacher, wot has a MA, says its' ok too.

I wouldn't put it in a formal academic essay, but in everyday use it's perfectly acceptable.

(And yes, before you ask, I did do a formal essay writing course)

anonym wrote:

MTV knows THERE stuff!

.

MTV knows their stuff or did you mean "its?"

I hear this everyday; "there's three of us."

Americans have twisted the English language so much that most of us don't even know where to begin addressing this issue.

JimFiore wrote:

Then there's the folks who use the word "literally" in a figurative sense, as in "That guy's literally the size of a house". Really? Must be a pretty small house.

This one's the winner to me. To the best of my knowledge, no sports commentator or radio personality has ever used the word literally to mean anything other than figuratively, which is its opposite.

grammar bitch wrote:

haha it's "ridiculous", not "redikulus" you moron!!

I will assume that you're acting the part of the typical moron poster and are not an example of one.

I understand that using "they" in place of "he" has become accepted, but it is clearly WRONG. "Someone" is singular while "they" is plural.

Accepted, yes. Perfectly acceptable, I think not.

Sorry to inform you mystery jet, but you are definitely wrong in this argument. Their is the possessive variation of the word they which, of course, is plural. Just because you commonly hear it in spoken English doesn't mean it is correct.

correction wrote:

I understand that using "they" in place of "he" has become accepted, but it is clearly WRONG. "Someone" is singular while "they" is plural.

Accepted, yes. Perfectly acceptable, I think not.

I've just consulted two dictionaries, one of which was the OED, and they/their may be used as a generic replacement for he/his or she/hers.

It has evolved into one of those words with more than one usage or meaning.

And in living language, there is no wrong.

slowcoach wrote:

And in living language, there is no wrong.

True, and in races there are no losers. We're all winners! And whatever creative grammar you want to invent, it's just fine. [insert pat on the head here]

It's not just Americans. The Brits make the same ridiculous mistakes that we do, but Americans tend to think that anything said with a British accent sounds intelligent.

slowcoach wrote:

And in living language, there is no wrong.

What if I spelled "dog" b-l-g-o-p-h-o-r-n-a-x. Would that be wrong? If everyone spelled it "blgophornax", would that make it better, or would we simply be deciding collectively to throw out any semblance of useful phonetics?

One of the most important attributes of useful language is clarity.