Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Nigel Parsons Date: 22 May 19 - 03:50 PM Exactly, Jos. (Did you read what I wrote, Joe?). The 'unknown' (or at least, unconvicted) perpetrator is the - wait for it - 'perpetrator' (or 'offender' or 'criminal'). The 'suspect' is the person suspected of having been the perp. As I say, if you are saying that the suspect committed the crime, you are saying that the suspect committed the crime - so it defeats the purpose of calling them the 'suspect', which would be presumably to allow for the presumption of innocence. If the 'suspect' is unconvicted, then it isn't reasonable to describe them as the 'perpetrator', as that has yet to be confirmed. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Mrrzy Date: 22 May 19 - 03:28 PM Law and Order does not punish the offenders, as they claim, boom boom, but the suspects. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: meself Date: 22 May 19 - 03:08 PM Exactly, Jos. (Did you read what I wrote, Joe?). The 'unknown' (or at least, unconvicted) perpetrator is the - wait for it - 'perpetrator' (or 'offender' or 'criminal'). The 'suspect' is the person suspected of having been the perp. As I say, if you are saying that the suspect committed the crime, you are saying that the suspect committed the crime - so it defeats the purpose of calling them the 'suspect', which would be presumably to allow for the presumption of innocence. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Jos Date: 22 May 19 - 03:05 PM ... and as a contribution: I am getting increasingly fed up with the use, in plays, soaps, and such like, of "Well good luck with that ...". |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Jos Date: 22 May 19 - 03:01 PM So the report should say "The perpetrator broke into the house and killed two people. Police arrested the suspect ..." |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Thompson Date: 22 May 19 - 02:52 PM Is there a rule that all American films (and it's beginning to infest others) must have the line "Listen up"? |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Joe Offer Date: 22 May 19 - 02:22 PM What word would you suggest instead of "suspect," meself? Seems to me, that until a person is proved guilty, he/she is still a suspect and should not be assumed to be the perpetrator. That's why we have courts. -Joe- |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Donuel Date: 22 May 19 - 01:14 PM For a dyslexic there are no pet peeves with language. It is more like a painful aneurism. We have to give 400% effort 25% of the time just to be average. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: meself Date: 22 May 19 - 12:42 PM One that always irks me is the way the news media, at least in North America, use the noun 'suspect'. It originally meant, 'a person suspected of having committed a certain crime'; now it would seem to mean, 'a person who has definitely committed a certain crime but who has not yet been convicted in a court of law' - so you get reports such as, 'The suspect broke into the house and killed two people. Police arrested the suspect, John Smith, yesterday." Kinda defeats the purpose of using the term 'suspect', doesn't it? |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Mrrzy Date: 22 May 19 - 12:06 PM (alors) |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Mrrzy Date: 22 May 19 - 12:06 PM Ok: There is no such thing as a stray bullet. It's not as if you left the door open and it got out. NPR has started saying "in about 10 mn from now" -- pick one, people. Merde alord I had several more in mind when I refreshed this thread. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Crowhugger Date: 07 Oct 10 - 06:04 PM Yes, Songbob, and there's even Canadian English option sometimes. It accepts labour and neighbour as correct, but also realize, digitize etc. And it won't object to the nouns pretence, defence and practice. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Oct 10 - 05:30 PM "Adverts for special collections of CD'S" Tee hee. Watch those damned apostrophe's now! |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: GUEST,leeneia Date: 07 Oct 10 - 04:26 PM "apparent confusion when dealing with their/they're/there or whose/who's or your/you're..." I think most people understand these forms. Mistakes happen because people are typing fast. John MacKenzie: I just got your joke about the aspirates. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Oct 10 - 10:01 AM "People who say "decayed"(sic) when they mean "decade"." Misuse of Latin words or phrases, particularly where their use is superfluous. Omission of italics and square brackets where required. Heheh. That's the beauty of threads like this. You gotta be so careful... |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: GUEST,greymaus Date: 07 Oct 10 - 09:45 AM MY pet peeve? Everyone's apparent confusion when dealing with their/they're/there or whose/who's or your/you're. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: GUEST,Patsy Date: 07 Oct 10 - 09:36 AM Adverts for special collections of CD'S in particular for a certain Rock compilation set and I wouldn't be surprised if the classic ones were similar. They insist that you can ONLY BUY IT HERE! surely that must be untrue when I know that I've had nearly every track on so many other compliations that I have either bought or have ever had bought for me. I think I must have about 5 or 6 albums with Boston's More than a Feeling and Free's Alright Now. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: GUEST,leeneia Date: 06 Oct 10 - 10:44 AM Something else about 'decade.' It's fuzzy and pretentious. Why are journalists so in love with the word? They are supposed to get the facts. So why do they write "Almost three decades have passed since Joe Blow was tried for the murder of Jim Dokes?" Why not say "Joe Blow was tried 28 years ago?" Even better, "in 1982." That way, we know the reporter has checked the facts. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Sarah the flute Date: 06 Oct 10 - 08:44 AM My pet hates are.... Use of the word "There" by broadcasters. Why do they have to say at the end of the reporters piece ..."Fred Bloggs there" why not "Thankyou Fred Bloggs in Afghanistan" or wherever. Use of the phrase "Give it up for....." Give what up ? Why not just say a round of applause for. Weather forecasters using the phrase "as the day goes along" where is it going and along which route!!! Sarah |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: DMcG Date: 06 Oct 10 - 08:43 AM Two of my favourites: "a quantum leap" - you mean we have made the smallest possible leap? And an apostrophe one, such as I saw at the weekend "Coffee's and Teas" If you can't decide whether there should be an apostrophe or not, at least have the courage to go one way or the other. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler Date: 06 Oct 10 - 07:32 AM People who say "decayed"(sic) when they mean "decade". It's a noun so the stress is on the first syllable (very few exceptions in English). Other words that get mangled in the same way include "project" which often gets incorrectly pronounced the same way as the verb "to project" with the stress on the second syllable. Rule of thumb: noun - stress first syllable, verb stress second syllable. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Dave MacKenzie Date: 06 Oct 10 - 06:35 AM I get annoyed by "fresh" milk, that's been pasteurised and homogenised. If had fresh milk and it's had nothing done to it, and probably still warm. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: MGM·Lion Date: 06 Oct 10 - 05:16 AM Indeed, Ariel's 'sea change' in The Tempest has been greatly misunderstood and over-interpreted to mean 'a profound change'. No such thing. In its context in the play, it simply means 'a change into something connected with the sea': as Ferdinand's father lies "full fathom five", Ariel sings, his bones are turned to coral, his eyes to pearls, and everything else about him suffers a similar 'sea change'. But the phrase sounds sorta romantic, don't it eh?; so has been over-defined to death. ~Michael~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Anne Lister Date: 06 Oct 10 - 04:19 AM Now you've got me started ... "Sea change"/ "Step change". Sea change must have started with Ariel's song in The Tempest but what it has to do with change generally I don't know, but now we also have "step change". Surely it's all just changes? Permanent changes, transient changes, small changes ... |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: John MacKenzie Date: 06 Oct 10 - 04:18 AM The café across the way from me, has paninis on the menu !!!! Man went to see his doctor. He said, "Doctor, I've got a 'orrible 'eadache" The doctor said, "I suggest you take a couple of aspirates" |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: MGM·Lion Date: 06 Oct 10 - 02:50 AM The use of "anyone?" ~~ as in, "Let's have a thread about language. Pet-peeves, anyone?" ~Michael~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Ed T Date: 05 Oct 10 - 08:07 PM Stores that advertise fresh products....only to find they were "previously frozen", or "freshened", whatever that means. Fresh does not mean anything anymore? |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Bill D Date: 05 Oct 10 - 06:53 PM affect & effect....if you do not know the difference, please look it up. Like insure & ensure,it is NOT irrelevant. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Wesley S Date: 05 Oct 10 - 06:48 PM Any establishment that offers "homemade" food. Unless the person who made the apple pie lives there it's not "homemade". |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Oct 10 - 06:26 PM Gosh yes, beg the question. Awful. Unfortunately, the sense in which it is now commonly used, to raise the question (why can't people just say that!), is so prevalent that it is now recognised as acceptable by certain authorities. Degradation rules OK... |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Bill D Date: 05 Oct 10 - 05:19 PM and.... it's **wreak havoc, not 'wreck' havoc.......arrrggghhhhh (you want fun? Ask folks to provide the present tense of 'wrought'. The are 2, depending on whether it's about God or material ...(wrought iron) |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Anne Lister Date: 05 Oct 10 - 05:04 PM I'm another wincer every time someone confuses few and less ... but the other irritant, which has me reaching for something to throw at the radio (which tends to be where I hear it most) is the phrase "mitigate against". Must be confusion with "militate against" but it makes no sense at all. Oh, and the almost universal misuse of the phrase "beg the question". |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Bill D Date: 05 Oct 10 - 05:04 PM Both my 'on-the-fly' spell checker and the one in my Opera browser allow ME to add words to their list, so I don't get 'beeped' at when I decide to type thru instead of through. As to UK spelling vs. American...we in the colonies are fairly thrifty, and so many of our spellings are shorter....(leaving out that 'u' must save...oh...tons (not tonnes)..of printing ink and megabytes of HD space every year... ☺ |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: John MacKenzie Date: 05 Oct 10 - 04:53 PM I hate the phrase ONE HUNDRED!"!!! |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: GUEST,Songbob Date: 05 Oct 10 - 04:34 PM If I'm not mistaken, some software packages allow the user to choose 'British English' vs. 'American English' for their documents. But what I haven't seen so far is an Operating System with the same choices. Perhaps those choices are there when you install the damned thing, I don't know. In any case, you could type 'colour' in Word and have it right, but in a chat room (or on the Mudcat, for that matter) it gets flagged as incorrect. Someone needs to invent a universal "universe setting," that applies language rules to all the content, no matter the source. Now that would be handy! Bob |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: GUEST,Dáithí Date: 05 Oct 10 - 09:19 AM My current pet hate... refute when they mean deny... and from journalists, usually1 D |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: GUEST,Patsy Date: 05 Oct 10 - 08:10 AM Any automated telephone message especially the 'your call is important to us' aaaah! |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Oct 10 - 08:00 AM It wasn't directed at anyone. Just something I've occasionally mused over for some time. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: MGM·Lion Date: 05 Oct 10 - 07:50 AM Steve ~~ If that was addressed to me or Sandy McLean, one of whose points I was developing, I would point out that neither of us was in any way 'berating' the American system; merely querying the logic of spellchecks which mark our own spelling [which I am sure you will agree at least remains a viable option] as incorrectly spelt when we have opted for the UnionJack rather than the OldGlory logo in the computer toolbar. That seems to be a piece of poor programing at HQ to me! And an implied beratement on THEIR part of OUR perfectly acceptable system. ~Michael~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Oct 10 - 06:42 AM I tend not to defend many things American, but I have to speak up for American spelling. English may well have started here in England but many more non-English than English people speak English these days and a big majority use American-English spellings. It's typically quirky (and very honourable) of the Brits to hang on for dear life to their own way of spelling, but it's a bit Canute-like to berate the Yanks for their system, which (I hate to say) is often more logical than ours. But who wants logic to enter into it! |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: MGM·Lion Date: 05 Oct 10 - 04:04 AM "....in the USA they intentionally spell words such as labour, harbour, honour, etc. incorrectly by dropping the silent "U". That is their right, I suppose, and I have no objection to that. What does piss me off though is when computer spell-checkers keep underlining these words when I spell them correctly!...." Agreed, Sandy ~ tho your 'incorrectly' might be queried as a bit if a relativist term here?. And WHY does it do so when one has opted for the UK setting in the computer toolbar-menu? I mean, what is the use of having this option if it doesn't recognise this distinction? This refers to the system; is it the same with other computers? And, for info, the word 'recognise' in the last line of previous para has acquired a red line because I didn't type 'recognize' ~~ which I categorically decline to do, Mr Macintosh!} ~Michael~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: GUEST,Songbob Date: 05 Oct 10 - 12:56 AM To illustrate a few of my pet peeves in spelling, may I say: I would of told you that some folks are just loosers, And the Internets filled with poor English users, But noone ever said its easy To express yourself as non-cheesy, Without you become a language abuser. Yeah, I know it's not much, but it's off the top of my head, so I couldn't be exhaustive in the listing. Bob |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Ed T Date: 05 Oct 10 - 12:30 AM asHphalt, pronounced that way. Presently, when currently is meant. I should have went,when gone is meant. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Sandy Mc Lean Date: 04 Oct 10 - 11:26 PM As my frequent posts will show spelling is not a strong point of mine. That being said in the USA they intentionally spell words such as labour, harbour, honour, etc. incorrectly by dropping the silent "U". That is their right, I suppose, and I have no objection to that. What does piss me off though is when computer spell-checkers keep underlining these words when I spell them correctly! That's my rant on this! :-} |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 04 Oct 10 - 07:59 PM "Half a pee"??? Man, you gotta see a doctor about that prostate! Dave Oesterreich |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Oct 10 - 07:18 PM Yeah Joe. "Existential": is it the most pretentious word of all? Or should we vote instead for "paradigm shift?" "A city destroyed by an earthquake is devastated." Indeed. But it is certainly not "razed to the ground" (or, even worse, "raised to the ground"). |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: GUEST,Bert Date: 04 Oct 10 - 06:49 PM 'Decimalization' when they really mean centigesamalization (or however you spell it). There IS no unit between the pound and the new penny. The term florin is obsolete. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: artbrooks Date: 04 Oct 10 - 06:10 PM 'Decimate'. It means "reduce by ten percent". It is not a synonym for devastate. An army that has 10 soldiers in every hundred killed has been decimated. A city destroyed by an earthquake is devastated. |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Liz the Squeak Date: 04 Oct 10 - 05:58 PM Hiccups rather than hiccoughs. People who say 'I don't want to be rude/offend you/single you out but... because it always means they are about to be very rude, or offensive or pick on you for something. If you don't want to do it, don't do it! LTS |
Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves From: Joe_F Date: 04 Oct 10 - 05:40 PM All the following, not in themselves, but in their currently fashionable senses, which perhaps need not be specified: abuse, agenda, contradiction, define, denial, disorder, dysfunctional, excellence, existential, featured, feel, foundation, genocide, icon, identity, impact, incredible, international, issue, legacy, legendary, multicultural, narcissism, personality, potential, price tag, quality, reinvent, relatively, resolve, showcase, signature, total, who. |