List some phrases you absolutely abhor..

[jemcam]

"Same old, same old" Makes me want to fucking scream.

 

[dank69]

I worked with a woman who would always ask for our "John Henry" instead of "John Hancock" when she wanted our signature.

They're both wrong. It's 'Herbie Hancock'

 

[ShawnD1]

They're both wrong. It's 'Herbie Hancock'

I'm totally going to start saying this.

 

[eits]

i HATE when people say "e-centric" when it's supposed to be "ec-centric" when they read the word eccentric.

 

[EKKC]

"comparing apples to oranges."

 

[SphinxnihpS]

I never made any connection to the Germans, I merely included jerry-built because it could be one reason some say jerry-rig instead of jury-rig.



No one said this thread was about US English.



I'll half concede on this one. You are right, the standard sequence of eat-have is the original, but it's a bit pedantic - and wrong - to suggest have-eat is somehow inherently illogical.

I didn't say you made the connection with the Germans. I just didn't know why you were bringing it up at all because your post was mainly arguing with my post which was foo fighting someone else's idea, who had posited that the derivation was war slang.

I guess not, but I do abhor Towards. I had some pretty nasty teachers in my day. Maybe it was a pet peeve of theirs and not truly wrong, or maybe it is wrong but so often repeated, that it was finally recognized. Either is equally plausible (but I lean to the latter at some point in history).

Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake? This is both the original phrase, and the situation you find yourself in.

I think it is inherently illogical to reverse the two verbs. The idiom is supposed to suggest the impossible (do you expect it both ways/you can't have it both ways), so the order is important in communicating the impossible... is not possible. How do you have it after you eat it? You can not eat a cake and then have it (to look at), but you can have it, and then eat it. One is possible, one is not, therefore the logical order of the verbs must be eat, have.

Your half-concession is a perfect example of the idiom itself. I am right about the original order, but why is not important? This is the only piece of illogic thus far.

Pedantic, absolutely!

 

[CZroe]

They're both wrong. It's 'Herbie Hancock'

I don't get it. It most certainly is "John Hancock." If that's supposed to be a joke, still, I don't get it.

John Hancock ... is remembered for his large and stylish signature on the United States Declaration of Independence, so much so that "John Hancock" became, in the United States, a synonym for "signature".

 

[CZroe]

"Same old, same old" Makes me want to fucking scream.

You should have heard one of my friends! He would even write it in IMs: "sameo sameo."

 

[Azraele]

"Pl0x."

Apparently it's the new cool kids way to say "please."

It drives me nuts.

 

[CZroe]

You are flat out wrong on all accounts. You are plain misinformed on the derivation of jury-rigged. You are have no clue why duck tape is called duck tape. Hip derived from hep (probably due to mis-pronunciation/hearing), making hep correct and hip a perpetuated mistake (like great person or Gnome, AK for example).

What makes you think that there can only be one kind of "rigging?" I've heard all three and can understand that they have different but similar origins due to the very nature that it is an Englsh phrase like any other. You can substitute any noun in there. "Child-rigged" means that children rigged it. N-word rigged beans it was rigged by a black man. Both can be used to describe something that wasn't but gives the perception that it was (biased or otherwise). If anything, jury-rig is the hardest to understand because it does not mean that the jury rigged something (rather, that they have been rigged). If anything, it doesn't apply to quick, sloppy, or temporary fixes as well, assuming the origin of jerry-rigged is as described. Fixing a jury isn't exactly "simple."

 

[SunnyD]

Basically, I dont have anything that really stands out

That said, certain internet stuff like "QQ" gets on my nerves, and also people who use pretentious writing style to score some extra IQ points, which they wish they had in real life

And btw, its "Could HAVE" not "Could OF"

Oh, and I know Im alone here but I hate the whole concept of saying "Thanks"... If Im doing you a favor its because:

1 - I benefit from it somehow
2 - Im happy to help, so Ill do it even if I dont gain anything from it

Both render "Thanks" useless, and if you really want to express your gratitude so much, do it with an action instead of a word

On the contrary, it's could've, which is a common (if not slang) contraction of could have and is pronounced very similarly if not identical to could of. Of course you could've known this if you had known what an apostrophe was.

 

[Mr. Lennon]

Cool beans


I have only heard it a couple times, but each time I have has always given me the biggest urge to punch the person saying it.

 

[Tempered81]

WWJD was annoying to me.

 

[AMCRambler]

"You see, the thing is..." usually followed by some long, drawn out version of what their take is on a particular topic. Or maybe even their take on a totally unrelated topic.

 

[Pneumothorax]

"outstanding!"
"absolutely!"
"let's be clear"

That bolded word was used excessively during the real estate boom days. My ex-roomie was a loan officer at the time and that word was said at least several times a minute in his office by him and his co-workers.

 

[Patranus]

"Yes we can"

 

[OverVolt]

Cool beans


I have only heard it a couple times, but each time I have has always given me the biggest urge to punch the person saying it.

Aw cmon I say cool beans sometimes... mostly to people I don't like and I'm just dismissing what they are saying, but still. At least I get to crack myself up inside to entertain myself as I hear some lame story.

 

[ahenkel]

my cousin used to say but fuckin' all the time instead of just but.

 

[vshah]

"no means no"

 

[OverVolt]

"Stranger Danger!"

Okay its more like it makes me lol, but still.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

What makes you think that there can only be one kind of "rigging?" I've heard all three and can understand that they have different but similar origins due to the very nature that it is an Englsh phrase like any other. You can substitute any noun in there. "Child-rigged" means that children rigged it. N-word rigged beans it was rigged by a black man. Both can be used to describe something that wasn't but gives the perception that it was (biased or otherwise). If anything, jury-rig is the hardest to understand because it does not mean that the jury rigged something (rather, that they have been rigged). If anything, it doesn't apply to quick, sloppy, or temporary fixes as well, assuming the origin of jerry-rigged is as described. Fixing a jury isn't exactly "simple."

There is no jerry-rigged. This is people hearing jury-rigged wrong and repeating the mistake. This does NOT make it correct. There is a jerry-built from the late 1800s. Jury-rigged is from the 1700s and has ZERO TO DO WITH JUDICIAL JURIES.

You can substitute all you want. I don't even have a problem with any of them, except when they are derived from human error, as in the case of jerry-rigged.

 

[OverVolt]

If wikipedia has taught me anything, it's that intellictual facts are actually a democracy, so screw it I don't care about this jerry-rigged arguement.

 

[dank69]

intellictual

 

[OverVolt]

intellictual

haha, I could use firefox too. I love my spelling errors.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

If wikipedia has taught me anything, it's that intellictual facts are actually a democracy, so screw it I don't care about this jerry-rigged arguement.

Yeah, they just vote on history every few decades. Back when I was in school they taught us about Civil War III and how we won our independence from Israel.