Can we discuss pet peeves here? (6 Viewers)

[BeTheMatch]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

 

[Scoresman]

My wife refuses to load the dishwasher efficiently. Group like-sized plates together and put each type of silverware in its own compartment. Makes unloading much easier. Also, put things in in a way that maximizes the amount you can fit

But putting them wherever you want makes loading easier? Which one wins out?

It really doesn't, though. If you're dropping a plate in, it takes no more time to put it next to a similarly sized plate. It takes no extra effort to put the forks with the other forks

For utensils it does because you have to put each utensil in individually if we do it your way. When loading, I just grab a handful of utensils and throw it into the slot. Takes way less time.

Yes, my wife yells at me for how I load the dishwasher.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

My wife refuses to load the dishwasher efficiently. Group like-sized plates together and put each type of silverware in its own compartment. Makes unloading much easier. Also, put things in in a way that maximizes the amount you can fit

But putting them wherever you want makes loading easier? Which one wins out?

It really doesn't, though. If you're dropping a plate in, it takes no more time to put it next to a similarly sized plate. It takes no extra effort to put the forks with the other forks

For utensils it does because you have to put each utensil in individually if we do it your way. When loading, I just grab a handful of utensils and throw it into the slot. Takes way less time.

Yes, my wife yells at me for how I load the dishwasher.

Wife swap?

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

 

[wlwiles]

RE: Dishwashers

Every night I load the dishwasher, put in the soap, and set it to a 3 hour delay so it'll start somewhere around midnight (so we're not fighting it for water if someone takes a night-time shower). And every night, my wife will wander into the kitchen for a drink of water and to take her nightly medicine. She'll open the dishwasher and put her glass in it, and forget to hit Start again to resume the countdown. And of course no one thinks to check it as we're rushing out the door in the morning, so we come home in the evening to a full dishwasher of dirty dishes that never got ran.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

The English language in general is a pet peeve

It really is a stupid language.

 

[3C's]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

Irregardless, it doesn't really matter right?

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

I would give you a peace of my mind but I'm not sure it would come across tongue and cheek.

 

[BeTheMatch]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

Not to be pedantic, but I don't think any of those are examples where meanings changed. They've simply been and are continuing to be used incorrectly.

 

[belljr]

Irregardless let's move on

 

[Snoopy]

Irregardless let's move on

I am feeling disinterested, but not uninterested in this.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I'm pretty sure this is all a mute point.

 

[belljr]

I'm pretty sure this is all a mute point.

It's moo

Like a cow's opinion

It's moo

 

[Snoopy]

I'm pretty sure this is all a mute point.

I can't say anything about that.

 

[Drunken knight]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

Not to be pedantic, but I don't think any of those are examples where meanings changed. They've simply been and are continuing to be used incorrectly.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

 

[BeTheMatch]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

Not to be pedantic, but I don't think any of those are examples where meanings changed. They've simply been and are continuing to be used incorrectly.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Hey, he threw out pedant first. I was just riffing off that.

 

[Dan Lambskin]

I think we’re the only culture that has to have eggs/bacon/etc as a breakfast item. Other cultures don’t have such distinction. Asians eats rice for breakfast, Europeans eat lunch meat, etc.

Yeah, but our breakfast food is legitimately better than what those countries have to offer. You're right that American breakfasts are kind of distinctive, but they're distinctive in a good way. Our biggest problem is getting all-day breakfast menus to become a regular thing, not replacing our breakfasts with the sorry spreads they put out in Europe.

(Seriously, what kind of person picks a croissant and day-old lunchmeat over huevos rancheros or biscuits and gravy?)

I like them equally. You're not getting day old lunchmeat in Europe. Have you even even been? Best bread, cheese, and charcuterie in the world. One of my favorite breakfasts ever was waking up in Italy on my honeymoon to a spread of breads, fruit, cheese, and lunchmeat.

That said, I also love a good eggs/bacon/potatoes/toast breakfast too. A Denny's grand slam sounds good right now.

Moons Over My Hammy is a top 10 late-night drunk sandwich option.

There's only 2 things good at 3am .....

Any eggs, egg sandwich, pancake from the diner OR
Taco Bell

pizza

3 Things!!!!!

My apologies

White Castle

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

My big grammar problem is with the misuse of "I" versus "me." I know people think they are being polite, but are they just nuts? "George gave a car to Janice and I." WTF? Are you Miss Piggy? Do you really think someone gave anything to "I"? Ghah.

And German is way worse. It was so bad they are changing their language so it makes more sense and is easier to use. Unlike the French language police who pitched fits about their language.

 

[belljr]

Um miss piggy said moi

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Um miss piggy said moi

Still incorrect.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Pedant.

 

[Snoopy]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

My big grammar problem is with the misuse of "I" versus "me." I know people think they are being polite, but are they just nuts? "George gave a car to Janice and I." WTF? Are you Miss Piggy? Do you really think someone gave anything to "I"? Ghah.

And German is way worse. It was so bad they are changing their language so it makes more sense and is easier to use. Unlike the French language police who pitched fits about their language.

Ich bin ein Berliner (a jelly doughnut)?

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

My big grammar problem is with the misuse of "I" versus "me." I know people think they are being polite, but are they just nuts? "George gave a car to Janice and I." WTF? Are you Miss Piggy? Do you really think someone gave anything to "I"? Ghah.

And German is way worse. It was so bad they are changing their language so it makes more sense and is easier to use. Unlike the French language police who pitched fits about their language.

Ich bin ein Berliner (a jelly doughnut)?

I don't pry into your private life.

 

[belljr]

Um miss piggy said moi

Still incorrect.

Moi means me ...not sure what you got against miss piggy. It's ok to admit you messed up ...

 

[Leroy Hoard]

On a related note, does it bother anyone else that a pig is in love with a frog? Doesn't seem quite right to me on some levels.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Um miss piggy said moi

Still incorrect.

Moi means me ...not sure what you got against miss piggy. It's ok to admit you messed up ...

I know what "moi" means, but Miss Piggy rarely uses it when the word "me" would be correct.

 

[Snoopy]

On a related note, does it bother anyone else that a pig is in love with a frog? Doesn't seem quite right to me on some levels.

When she gets a frog in her throat?

 

[Andy Dufresne]

On a related note, does it bother anyone else that a pig is in love with a frog? Doesn't seem quite right to me on some levels.

Hey man, LOVE IS LOVE!

 

[Waldorf]

On a related note, does it bother anyone else that a pig is in love with a frog? Doesn't seem quite right to me on some levels.

Kind of makes you sick, doesn’t it?

 

[GreenNGold]

When people just leave gobs of toothpaste in their sink after brushing their teeth.

 

[Snoopy]

When people just leave gobs of toothpaste in their sink after brushing their teeth.

A sink with teeth?

 

[mr. furley]

interminable college halftimes

 

[BeTheMatch]

interminable college halftimes

I would've bet my life that Jeremiah was gonna be a two-handed chest pass kind of guy. Still reeling from it.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

Not to be pedantic, but I don't think any of those are examples where meanings changed. They've simply been and are continuing to be used incorrectly.

But what does “incorrectly” mean? According to who? The meanings of words are not immutable. They mean what the public collectively decides they mean. If everyone understands disinterested to mean uninterested, then how can you say it’s incorrect to use it that way?

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

Understandably difficult? Is this where we're at now?

The English language in general is a pet peeve.

I've said this before -- probably in this very thread -- but there is a certain type of language pedant who drives me crazy. The one who corrects you on could care less or disinterested or literally.

My view is that a) most of the people who complain about that stuff aren't really mad, they're just trying to show off their supposed intelligence, and b) the point of language is to be understood, not to follow a set of ever-changing rules. If I tell you I could care less what you do, there is nobody who doesn't immediately understand I am saying I don't care. And yeah, maybe the original meaning of disinterested was unbiased, but in context, it's pretty clear if someone is saying they're uninterested. Language shifts based on usage, and if enough people use it to mean uninterested, then that becomes a new meaning of the word, regardless of what Noah Webster may have said 200 years ago

My big grammar problem is with the misuse of "I" versus "me." I know people think they are being polite, but are they just nuts? "George gave a car to Janice and I." WTF? Are you Miss Piggy? Do you really think someone gave anything to "I"? Ghah.

I mean, grammar rules are a little different. Though even there, all our high school English teachers told us to never use “they” to refer to an individual, yet because of the whole gender fluidity movement it has become more acceptable.

In any event, what bothers me about people who say “between you and I” Is that they are trying hard to sound intelligent but actually making it worse. Same goes for anyone who pronounces it “mis-CHEEV-ee-yus”. Look at how it’s spelled, genius. The “i“ comes before the “v”, not after

 

[jhib]

The English language in general is a pet peeve

It really is a stupid language.

Yeah, but at least we don't have to worry about the gender of every stupid little inanimate object.

 

[jhib]

My big grammar problem is with the misuse of "I" versus "me." I know people think they are being polite, but are they just nuts? "George gave a car to Janice and I." WTF? Are you Miss Piggy? Do you really think someone gave anything to "I"? Ghah.

I finally got my wife on board with me on this one. Every time we are together when someone (usually one of her parents) incorrectly uses "and I," we glance at each other and mouth, "me."

 

[Pip's Invitation]

English was kind of a mess until the Victorians, and now it’s becoming a mess again.

Look at documents from the Revolutionary period, spelling is all over the place.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

When people mess up this up it makes me loose my patience.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Also, people who routinely use the term "myself" when they mean "me" or "I." For example,

The new model was discussed on a Zoom call with Jim, Mary, and myself.

I don't care about the grammatical hang-ups with "me" vs. "I" in sentences like this -- I get that that's just grammar pedantry and I don't really care if people mess it up. What I object to about "myself" is the pretentiousness. This language has the uncanny effect of incrementally removing the speaker from the story. "I" wasn't on that call -- it was "myself." The flowery language simultaneously inflates the speakers' importance while also reducing their agency.

 

[Mister CIA]

pretty ****ing sick of people telling me to "just sign up for X" music/tv service instead of having cable

"dude, just get youtubetv and netflix and hulu and paramount and disney and espn+ and peacock nstead of cable". sure. it will cost.. roughly? the same but in 6 months each of them ups their rates, changes the terms of service, you have to pay a premium to get what you had before and/or they pile on unblockable ads mid-show. and in a year paramount won't exist anymore but so what.. you can just sign up for 2 years of MGM+ since they are buying the HGTV channel and Amazon owns them both so you can get a discount on Prime shipping + get that channel for $29/month instead of $49.

and why would i have a radio without Sirius? and if you're going to get it just get premium service for multiple vehicles + home. it's only $69 a month.

and why am i using an Android phone instead of an iPhone? Android doesn't even have the extra 2 pixels that the iPhone 15a(1).2 has this month. and they're even adding another pixel to the 15a(2).11.a in 3 months, but you'll have to buy the new phone to get that and a new charger because your old one won't be compatible. thankfully it's only $119 a month for the service and a new phone is just $1200, or $1600 if you want a color other than black... and who just wants a black phone when you get custom design your own color combo for another $400 + $19 a month??

sure, i'll cut back on my extravagant $13/day Starbucks habit to partially fund mby new $982/month tv & radio subscription package that i clearly need to have because everyone else has it.

and i can pay the bills in person driving my 2024 vehicle with the 6-year loan at $820 a month.

i'm a well heeled FBG after all who just ****ing ****s money, these are things everyone has and it's important that i do what everyone else obviously does because, duh.


oh, and how can i forget subscription services to operate my dishwasher, fridge, hvac and oven. there are apps for all those things that you can just pay for instead of manually operating them like some plebe. which, of course i won't really need anyways because my grubhub subscription delivers me food daily and my maid subscription cleans up after me. it's all on an app, i just have to pay to skip the ads on it before i order a meal and watch a short video to unlock the box the food comes in.

My link. NSFW, language.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

English was kind of a mess until the Victorians, and now it’s becoming a mess again.

This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put.

 

[Keerock]

Grammar police time, and this one is understandably difficult:

The use of led vs lead.

Led is the past tense or past participle of the verb lead. Unless you're in the present, you should get the lead out

The led in

[1] The class will be led by Kim.

is used to make a passive voice construction. The active voice equivalent would be

[2] Kim will lead the class.

So led is here not the past tense of lead, but rather the past participle. While one of the uses of the past participle is to form tenses like the present perfect (Kim has led the class before), which are about the past, another use of it is to form the passive voice.

3 would be the simple past form, "Kim led the class."

When people mess up this up it makes me loose my patients.

FYP

 

[Zeppelin]

Lead Zeppelin.

Not funny.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

On a related note, does it bother anyone else that a pig is in love with a frog? Doesn't seem quite right to me on some levels.

My son used to watch Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, and I remember there was an episode where Mickey Mouse had a pet kitten and it made his pet dog (not to be confused with his dog best friend) jealous. Oh and there’s also Daniel Tiger, where his best friend is an owl. Best not to think of this stuff too deeply

 

[Keerock]

On a related note, does it bother anyone else that a pig is in love with a frog? Doesn't seem quite right to me on some levels.

My son used to watch Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, and I remember there was an episode where Mickey Mouse had a pet kitten and it made his pet dog (not to be confused with his dog best friend) jealous. Oh and there’s also Daniel Tiger, where his best friend is an owl. Best not to think of this stuff too deeply

Pretty sure Pooh and Tigger would not get along IRL... And Piglet would be but a snack for Tigger

 

[belljr]

Donald duck doesn't wear pants but when he gets out of the shower he puts a towel around his waist.....what?

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Don't get me started on Jessica and Roger Rabbit.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Also, people who routinely use the term "myself" when they mean "me" or "I." For example,

The new model was discussed on a Zoom call with Jim, Mary, and myself.

I don't care about the grammatical hang-ups with "me" vs. "I" in sentences like this -- I get that that's just grammar pedantry and I don't really care if people mess it up. What I object to about "myself" is the pretentiousness. This language has the uncanny effect of incrementally removing the speaker from the story. "I" wasn't on that call -- it was "myself." The flowery language simultaneously inflates the speakers' importance while also reducing their agency.

We are not amused.

ETA: Political candidates have clearly been coached to use the first-person plural as much as possible. Mitt Romney took this to its logical extreme when, discussing an issue around his gardener using undocumented immigrants, he said, "we personally" met with the company.