Heartland

Almiche V wrote: Keep hearing/reading:

"The exact same thing happened....."

Look, it's either the same thing or it's not the same thing.

Just passing.

Can we add people who describe something as "virtually unique" to a new circle of hell? Also, anyone who says "7am in the morning", or who don't know the difference between "number" and "amount", as in "Please make sure to take all of your personal belongings with you when leaving the train, as this will help to reduce the amount of security alerts." The guy who used to do the announcements at Charing Cross tube station never knew how close he came to dismemberment - I heard him say that every morning for 2 years...

Almiche V wrote:Here's a new pleasure that's sweeping over:

'despatch' instead of 'dispatch'

This is basic stuff we're talking about.

Oooh, that's one of my favourites!

EvilBastard wrote:Can we add people who describe something as "virtually unique" to a new circle of hell? Also, anyone who says "7am in the morning"

LOL

There really doesn't appear to be any distinguishing between the two! They're just 'variants'...

I do prefer dispatch though.

I have an associate who says 'opposed' instead of 'supposed.' This grates somewhat

"Could of," "should of," "would of," and the like (for "could've," "should've," "would've," of course - looks like the concept of contractions has been lost on a large majority of folks, these days )..."supposably" (for "supposedly" - when the illiterate try - and fail - to impress others with their inferior comprehension of "big words" )..."all the sudden" (for "all of a sudden," which is merely a slovenly version of "suddenly," anyway)...

Good l*rd, this laughable crap makes my blood boil. I've seen it in newspapers and periodicals, now, and even on news sites. Pathetic!

When I see signs or adverts for "x items and less" I do actually shout "FEWER!"

I've an aunt who says "exackelty" instead of "exactly" - once you get that in your brain you'll have some trouble dislodging it.

I don't know if this is a specifically Glasgow/Scotland thing, but I have also had it up to my eyeballs with:
"done" in place of "did" (as in "Aye, he done it 5 minutes ago")....
"... I had went [somewhere]"
"... Claire, that fax has came in for you"
"broke" instead of "broken" (i.e. "our server's broke").

Arrrrrggghhh! And there are sooo many more where that came from!

Dark wrote:When I see signs or adverts for "x items and less" I do actually shout "FEWER!"

boudicca wrote:"our server's broke"

The correct approved technical term is, of course, "f--ked".

"Heartland's down again."
"I know what's wrong with it."
"What?"
"It's f--ked."

mh wrote:I've an aunt who says "exackelty" instead of "exactly" - once you get that in your brain you'll have some trouble dislodging it.

I worked on a golf crew years ago with a guy from a southern U.S. state, who pronounced it "idZAACKly!" One of my brothers was on the same crew at the time; even now, when chatting on the phone or hanging out over the holidays, sooner or later, one of us *has* to say it! It's stuck in our heads (along with that guy's peculiar intonation) forever!

mh wrote:

boudicca wrote:"our server's broke"

The correct approved technical term is, of course, "f--ked".

It would probably have been a more accurate description, from the befuddled look on the I.T guy's face...

boudicca wrote:I don't know if this is a specifically Glasgow/Scotland thing, but I have also had it up to my eyeballs with:
"done" in place of "did" (as in "Aye, he done it 5 minutes ago")....
"... I had went [somewhere]"
"... Claire, that fax has came in for you"
"broke" instead of "broken" (i.e. "our server's broke").

Arrrrrggghhh! And there are sooo many more where that came from!

Nope, we have that down here in Portsmouth. In fact, it's probably where it began.

Actually, I blame Eastenders.

My dad's (uneducated) Warwickshire folks used to use "done" for "did," etc.

So it's an epidemic then!

SINsister wrote:"supposably" (for "supposedly"

Aaaarrgghh, I'm starting to itch all over......

SINsister wrote:"Could of," "should of," "would of," and the like (for "could've," "should've," "would've," of course - looks like the concept of contractions has been lost on a large majority of folks, these days )..."supposably" (for "supposedly" - when the illiterate try - and fail - to impress others with their inferior comprehension of "big words" )..."all the sudden" (for "all of a sudden," which is merely a slovenly version of "suddenly," anyway)...

May we add gonna and wanna to the list?

boudicca wrote:

mh wrote:

boudicca wrote:"our server's broke"

The correct approved technical term is, of course, "f--ked".

It would probably have been a more accurate description, from the befuddled look on the I.T guy's face...

Of course, the correct word in this case is "borked", as ane ful kno.

Almiche V wrote:

SINsister wrote:"supposably" (for "supposedly"

Aaaarrgghh, I'm starting to itch all over......

Perhaps I can worsen your discomfort, sir..? Muahahahaha!

Don't get me started on the following (ffs, I'm on a roll!):
-the incorrect use of "then" and "than"
Hint:
"I'd rather be on vacation than at work." "Than" is usually used as a conjunction or as a preposition.
"Things were simpler then." "Then" is usually used to designate time or order.


-the incorrect use of "it's" and "its" *Shudder*
Hint:
"It's raining outside." "It's" is a contraction of "it is."
"It's gotten much colder." "It's" is a contraction of "it has."

"Its" is a possessive pronoun, NOT a contraction.
"The puppy nursed its injured paw." The injured paw belongs to the puppy in question.


-the incorrect use of possessive apostrophes, *OMFG*
Hint:
"My shoe's untied." (My shoe is untied.)
"Those shoes are mine." (Those shoes - plural of "shoe" - belong to me.)
BUT:
"That witch's shoes are pointy." (The shoes - plural - belonging to that witch are pointy.)
"Those witches' shoes are pointy." (The shoes - plural - belonging to several witches - plural - are pointy.)


You're welcome!

Petseri wrote:May we add gonna and wanna to the list?

Sure, but that's just slang/laziness, innit?

Dark wrote:I refuse to accept that a sentence may not be started with "And".

There's no technical reason not to. It's just a stylistic preference, like split infinitives.

I have a friend (and one with an other wise excellent grasp of language) who says "pacifically".

And (see?) can we add people who make unnecessary use of "inverted commas"?

However, all of you ranters have got a damned cheek considering the number of uses, within this thread, of Internet garbage like LMAO, OMFG etc. JUST WRITE THE BLEEDING WORDS!

One has to know the rules before one can break them...

SINsister wrote:

Petseri wrote:May we add gonna and wanna to the list?

Sure, but that's just slang/laziness, innit?

or The Ramones?