web
counter
 

Can We Settle This Once and For All?

By Donna Sherman | Posted Under Miscellaneous | Comments (179)



couldn_t-20071210-201021.jpg

Because it really has gone on long enough. “I could care less.” What is it about this phrase, this word-combo, that renders the speaker suddenly, fleetingly, unable to comprehend the simple nuances of the English language? Other faux-pas of the common vernacular may be as heinous, but at least they’re somewhat understandable. “Irregardless”? Clearly the speaker has heard the word “regardless” and has heard the preposition “ir-” and has almost certainly heard the two used together at some point because it’s fucking everywhere, and it sounds like a real English word, so by God, they will use it as one. Fine. Understandable. Hand them a dictionary and clear up the mess. Bemused means amused? Well, no, not really, but they sound the same, so I guess I can see where the confusion stems from. Again, a dictionary would solve that problem in a second.

English is a funny language. Flammable means inflammable, and Toronto traffic reporters would like you to both “speed up” and “slow up.” It’s silly, but at least the meaning of the words is there in the statement. But “I could care less”? You don’t need a dictionary for any of those words. Yet they still manage, as a group, to thoroughly destroy the credibility of many an otherwise intelligent human being. And these very same human beings know full well the definitions of each of those four words separately, or are at least capable of using them correctly in other situations, so WHAT, exactly, is going on here?

Let’s dissect the sentence. I: subject. Could: modal auxiliary verb used to express conditional possibility. Care: infinitive verb complemented by “could.” Less: quantifier in the truncated sentence “I could care less,” but negative comparative in the complete sentence “I could care less about that.” OK.

But for those of us who aren’t linguistics professors, or writers with an internet connection and too much time on our hands, there is a simpler way of telling that this sentence is wrong. Intuition.

Anyone who has grown up speaking English should be able to figure out what’s wrong here. Because they know English. I could care less = it is possible for me to care less = why the hell is this statement-worthy? That’s like me saying it is POSSIBLE for me to wear no clothes. I could be naked. OK, yeah, that’s possible, but I’m not, and we all know why, so, there’s really no need to bring it up.

Of course, there are times when this phrase is appropriate, albeit awkward sounding. A mosquito has bitten me on the hand. Well, I do care about that. I have, in the past, cared about other things less than that, so it is thus possible for me to care less about this incident. I could care less. Again, of course, this is a useless statement, and you’d probably be more likely to say something along the lines of “oh, shit,” or “fucking mosquitoes,” or “do I care that I was bitten by a creature that could be carrying malaria or West Nile, or parasites, or Rift Valley fever, Ross River Fever, or yellow fever and dengue fever, or many other fevers, or some other horrible, terrifying disease? Yes, I do care. I care A LOT.”

But what I am fed up with are people who just clearly have no idea what they are talking about. Actually, no, what I’m fed up with is that the use of this phrase has reached near epidemic proportions, and no one calls these people out on it, and I just can’t understand why. “Man, I hated that movie. I could care less what Peter Parker would like on emo.” Oh, you could, could you? Really? It is possible for you to have cared less about that happening? Thanks for sharing. Well I’ve got news for you, buddy. Those words don’t mean what you think they mean. Either that, or

  • you really, truly could find other things on the list of your life to care less about, so
    this is higher up on said list than those things, in which case

  • you actually did wish to see what Parker would like with a sad, bad wig and a case of whiteboy dancitis, which means that

  • you’re pleased that this image is now stuck with you for the foreseeable future, and so

  • your criticism makes no damn sense, and

  • I don’t like you.

    I could NOT care less what you have to say, because you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about.

    If you want to have an impact, say it properly. “I could not care less.” It can be modified in so many fun ways: I could not possibly care less. If I was dead, I couldn’t care less. These are statements worth stating. Of all the levels of caring I could possibly have for this situation, the level I have landed on is the absolute, bottom-of-the-rung nadir, the pinnacle of not caring. If it happened in front of me, I would wait for something else to happen before I yawned and scratched my ass because the amount of caring I couldn’t do would be that much.

    Is this maybe a silly thing to focus on in a world where “grrrl” (that’s three rs — three rs and no vowels) can be added to the Oxford English Dictionary (yes) (seriously), but I think it matters. Everyone knows and complains that our internet-addicted, instant-messaging culture is bringing about the destruction of the English language, but at least when kids “lol” or “rofl” or whatever the fuck else they’re coming up with these days to do to each other, both the sender and recipient, or speaker and listener, understand the sentiment that is trying to be expressed. At least this Newspeak follows its own internal logic, albeit stupid and incapable of expressing anything more complicated than the wish of one to bestow *hugs* upon another in order to ease their :’(. But “I could care less”? It follows no rules. It’s just a statement that has somehow been accepted to mean the exact opposite of what it actually means, without the speaker needing to employ the use of a sarcastic tone, and that is just confusing, stupid, and not at all OK and we should not stand for it anymore.

    Who is with me?

    Donna is a freelance writer with a BJ from Carleton. That’s right, her university gave her a Bachelors of Journalism. What did you think she meant? She can be reached by email here, but on second thought, please don’t tell her what you thought she meant.









    Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



    Bowl Championship Stupidity | Pajiba Sports | NYC Homicide: Reality vs. Television | In New York City's War On Crime...









    Comments

    8+ years ago, I snapped at someone for using "irregardless." He shook his head sadly at me, pulled down a dictionary, and showed me the word listed in its pages. Apparently, grammar and language will bend and change depending on the will of the lowest common denominator, eventually. W. T. F. My heart broke that day.

    Posted by: melia at October 20, 2010 1:55 PM

  • i just had a grammorgasm.

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 1:56 PM

    i was showing my neighbor allie's cake genius on hyperbole and a half.

    you all know how she pronounced it. and you all know why i had to laugh and laugh at her.

    hyperbowl.

    ::shakes head::

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 1:57 PM

    More articles about movies, fewer articles like this, plz.

    Posted by: the new transported man at October 20, 2010 1:57 PM

    Wow, just, wow.

    Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 20, 2010 2:00 PM

    Thank you for this. I felt like a good rant. It seems like the only good grammar out there is Spencer.

    Posted by: logar at October 20, 2010 2:01 PM

    Next topic, people who say "for all intensive purposes".

    Posted by: cloukie at October 20, 2010 2:04 PM

    I feel the same when people use normalcy in place of normality. I appear to have been shouted down by the masses, but it still bugs the shit out of me to this day.

    Posted by: Socrates at October 20, 2010 2:06 PM

    Next topic: I nominate "it's a mute point."

    More articles about grammar, the same number of articles about movies, plz!

    Posted by: MM at October 20, 2010 2:06 PM

    in a world where “grrrl” (that’s three rs — three rs and no vowels) can be added to the Oxford English Dictionary (yes) (seriously)

    I think it might be time for the human race to pack up and call it a civilization. Let the bees have their chance.

    Posted by: DarthCorleone at October 20, 2010 2:07 PM

    Every year we get a Christmas card from The Gallagher's. Is there a puzzle buried in the photo to tell us what or which of the Gallagher's sent us the card? Not that I can discern.

    Posted by: Mrs. Julien at October 20, 2010 2:08 PM

    I can't believe I have to explain this, but...

    "I could care less" is sarcasm. Maybe it's not thought of that way, but it clearly started that way. People were saying "I couldn't care less" as an insult, and some genius decided to flip it around and claim he could, meaning it sarcastically. And the phrase stuck.

    Is this really that big a deal?

    Posted by: DamnYankees at October 20, 2010 2:11 PM

    Ugh. Try listening to an NFL broadcast, where the announcers use "superlative" to say "super" and "physicality" instead of "effort." I have to use extra large maxi pads to sop up the blood coming out of my ears.

    Posted by: Crash at October 20, 2010 2:15 PM

    I gave up on the sanctity of English vocabulary when "Yummo" and "EVOO" both made the dictionary. However, you will pry my outdated grammar rules from my cold dead hands. Oxford commas are not optional and dashes are not separated by spaces nor indicated by a single hyphen.

    Posted by: Robert at October 20, 2010 2:16 PM

    That was fantastic. Made my day. Really. I could care less about it, but I don't. I care A LOT.

    Posted by: TylerDFC at October 20, 2010 2:17 PM

    @melia: I thought you were joking about irregardless in the dictionary. So I looked it up. Now my heart is broken:

    Merriam Webster on irregardless

    Money quote: "The most frequently repeated remark about it is that 'there is no such word.' There is such a word, however."

    @Robert: re "dashes are not separated by spaces nor indicated by a single hyphen"

    Damn, you are hardcore, brother.

    Posted by: MM at October 20, 2010 2:19 PM

    I can't believe I have to explain this, but...

    "I could care less" is sarcasm. Maybe it's not thought of that way, but it clearly started that way. People were saying "I couldn't care less" as an insult, and some genius decided to flip it around and claim he could, meaning it sarcastically. And the phrase stuck.
    --------

    No. I simply don't buy this. You give people WAY too much credit. And YES it is a big deal. Incorrect usage shouldn't be incorporated into our language simply because a lot of people get it wrong. Do enough of that and our language just gets dumbed down.

    Posted by: peachfish at October 20, 2010 2:19 PM

    I can't get over "anyways". That will bug me until I die.

    Posted by: Scully at October 20, 2010 2:21 PM

    I'm bookmarking this. And every time I see someone use this phrase on Facebook or in an email, I'm sending them this link. Yeah. I'm gonna be "that person" about this.

    Nice writing, Donna!

    Posted by: MelBivDevoe at October 20, 2010 2:22 PM

    @DamnYankees

    You are giving people entirely too much credit. They aren't using the phrase ironically like some post modern hipster twit. The people I hear use the expression simply aren't thinking about what they are saying. We are angry with them because they don't care about language and we do. We care so much it makes us seek out other individuals with whom we can share our annoyance. Then we become extremely self-conscious about our own writing while doing so. It's kind of poetic really.

    Posted by: Mrs. Julien at October 20, 2010 2:24 PM

    This "phrase means the opposite of what it says" thing happens in the English Language all the time:

    Clean Air Act
    Stimulus Package
    No Child Left Behind

    My current grammar hatred is for sportscaster who tell me that the wide receiver, "caught the ball in space." No he didn't. He caught the ball in Cleveland. Earth. Sol system. What they mean is "he caught the ball with space to run" or "with space around him" or "in the open field." That one's tearing me up right now. I think we have lost the battle on "could care less" just like we did when Warren G. Harding mispronounced [i]normality[/] as [i]normalcy[/i].

    Posted by: professor_love at October 20, 2010 2:25 PM

    See, I've got an ABJ, which doesn't sound like something dirty...it doesn't sound like anything. They couldn't pick one of the two words, so I've got this Yoda acronym.

    Yes, people need to stop saying and writing "could". It is ignorant, and that is bad.

    Posted by: Jay at October 20, 2010 2:26 PM

    The irony here is of course that the people who most need to read this article aren't willing to read this many words in one sitting.

    Posted by: Jack Burton at October 20, 2010 2:26 PM

    Thank you.

    Now could somebody please take on all the idiots who use the phrase "as far as" without realizing it should be "as far as ........goes". When did the "goes" disappear? Do they realize how ridiculous they sound?

    Then please tackle "go ahead". Why does everybody in the instructional business feel they can no longer just say "now press button B" and have to say "now go ahead and press button B" or the really insidious ""now WE'RE going to go ahead and press button B".

    Posted by: PaddyDog at October 20, 2010 2:28 PM

    I'm not convinced the phrase is grammatically incorrect, or at least, not irredeemably so. I would liken it to "I could give a crap" vs "I couldn't give a crap", (substitute rat's patoot or whatever other object of the sentence seems best for your choice of idiom).

    In any event, personally I would generally be inclined to use "I couldn't give a rat's patoot", meaning, my level of interest is so low, that I wouldn't even be prepared to donate one rat's patoot to hear how the saga of your workplace tirade turned out.

    On the other hand, I can understand if someone says "I could give a rat's patoot", not meaning that they are enthralled by the saga of my dating life, but that, while their level of interest is such that they might be prepared to donate a rat's patoot, or to listen to this story as opposed to hearing about a rat's patoot, their level of interest does not exceed it by much.

    So when I hear "I could care less", I hear "I could (in italics) care less... [but frankly it's difficult for me to imagine how]".

    Intonation and usage might negate the speaker's intention to use the phrase this way, and it loses some power to say "Frankly my dear, I could (ital) give a damn, but don't want to waste my time.", but I'm not sure the phrase is grammatically incorrect so much as it is an incomplete thought or sentence fragment.

    Posted by: Gentleman Farmer at October 20, 2010 2:29 PM

    As much as I hate to say that DamnYankees has a point (Rangers represent! HOLLA!), and I'm sure his history lesson is mere theory... Well, having taken linguistics courses in college, I can tell you that a linguist (big believers in cultrual relativism that lot) would have no problem with "I could care less." As DY notes, it's become a cultural catchphrase, the implied meaning of which is understood by all speakers. Both "I couldn't care less" and "I could care less" are basically interchangeable now. But only English majors get bent out of shape about it (and it's not even grammatically incorrect). Also, and lastly, language is ever changing and can only be pinned down to a moment. That's a good thing.

    Get back me when we're lamenting the fact that executives can't write a one sentence email without screwing it up, and we'll talk.

    The word "ask" was originally spelled "aks" (pronounced like its spelled, natch) and lasted that way much longer than our current form. Think about that the next time someone asks if they "can axe you a question." The more you know. Bah-bing-bah biiiiing.

    Posted by: RobP at October 20, 2010 2:30 PM

    This is one of my pet peeves too, but it cannot be stopped - I am convinced. I gave up long ago when people started saying they were or were not "enthused" about something instead of saying enthusiastic. Enthused is now in the dictionary and it irks me to no end - when did it become a verb??

    Posted by: SCG at October 20, 2010 2:32 PM

    This past weekend, I (like some big nerd) assisted my sometimes-ex, an English professor, with his midterm grading. His roommate is also an English professor, and oh the sentences we saw between the three of us. The ones that gave me the most frustration were the non-capitalization of "Facebook", the non-quotation of respective Facebook terms (i.e. "like"), and not hyphenating "real-life" when used as an adjective. However, as the papers we were grading were from a low-level composition class, the professors reassured me that grammar was often "the least of the students' worries."

    Posted by: kiyo-chan at October 20, 2010 2:33 PM

    "I gave up on the sanctity of English vocabulary when "Yummo" and "EVOO" both made the dictionary..."
    Posted by: Robert at October 20, 2010 2:16 PM

    About god-damned time.

    /crosses fingers for BAM! and BOO YA

    Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 20, 2010 2:33 PM

    @Crash,
    How about "I don't want to belittle the point". Also heard during an NFL broadcast.
    It provided my family with entertainment for the rest of the weekend.

    Posted by: Pea at October 20, 2010 2:33 PM

    professor_love: Sympathetic nod.

    Posted by: Dustin Rowles at October 20, 2010 2:33 PM

    It's an idiom. Idiom's frequently disregard grammatical or semantic rules, and are often only understood in a specific cultural context. That's what makes them idioms. Any linguist would tell you that if the phrase is understood by the intended audience, it is said correctly, regardless of grammar rules.

    Yours Truly,
    Your Local College English Instructor

    Posted by: Ruth at October 20, 2010 2:34 PM

    @ PaddyDog: Another classic is dropping "thing" from "the whole _____________ thing."

    You know, or another word to stand in for "thing" in that situation. I see this all the time and it drives me nuts. "Let's just forget about the whole finishing your sentences."

    Posted by: Melodie at October 20, 2010 2:36 PM

    And as soon as I hit enter, I realize that I left an unnecessary apostrophe in my comment, incorrectly making "idiom" possessive instead of plural, as I intended. Still, the meaning is clear, so I think I'll survive this punctuation mishap.

    Posted by: Ruth at October 20, 2010 2:36 PM

    All that said, I will die a little, and then a lot, the day agreeance becomes a word.

    My manager uses this on a figuratively daily basis.

    Sigh.

    Posted by: RobP at October 20, 2010 2:38 PM

    I'm with Damn Yankees, RobP and Ruth (PREACH IT, SISTER). Sure, get bent all out of shape about it, but it's become a phrase of its own, and everyone understands what it means. And frankly, I think people aren't going to give a shit either way about it when you correct them.

    Posted by: figgy at October 20, 2010 2:41 PM

    Oh, and I'm totally with Robert on the Oxford comma. How else do you know the last two articles are separate or combined ideas without it? How, damn you? HOW?!

    But he's totally on his own with the no-spaces between a dash. It just looks better, dude.

    Posted by: RobP at October 20, 2010 2:42 PM

    Plus there's just bigger fights to fight than this one, and I'm baffled at the rage this particular phrase brings up. When there's such things as your vs you're, than vs then, their vs there vs they're. Or people who say 'could of' instead of 'could have'.

    Posted by: figgy at October 20, 2010 2:43 PM

    Sportscasters suddenly stopped being descriptive about injuries to players. I think Al Michaels started doing it a few years back and it caught like wildfire. They say, "Smith is out with a knee," or, "Jones is sidelined with an ankle." We are now left to guess exactly what's wrong:

    Smith's knee was raped by a killer whale on a snorkling expedition in the Arctic and his ACL is pregnant with hoochie-fucking, seal-devouring, monochromatic man-whales? Sweet.

    Jones slipped in a pile of his own feces after injecting 1,000 cc's of HGH into his anus and got a high ankle sprain when it smashed against his coked-up, money-grubbing, fame-starved, whore wife's 80-carat diamond ring? Bet that hurt!

    Posted by: Kballs at October 20, 2010 2:43 PM

    Something funny: the first time I heard that phrase, I thought about it for a second, realized it was wrong, and assumed that I had heard it incorrectly. Then I heard it again, and again...and my faith in humanity as a whole was severely shaken.

    This really drives me nuts, along with people who put "queue" when they mean "cue" and those who use double negatives.

    Posted by: elleyezee at October 20, 2010 2:46 PM

    @RobP: Get back me when we're lamenting the fact that executives can't write a one sentence email without screwing it up, and we'll talk.

    It's not about spelling and grammar at their level. This is what the have administrative assistants for.

    Posted by: Mrs. Julien at October 20, 2010 2:47 PM

    Please start drinking until you could not care less about this. thank you.

    Posted by: J9 at October 20, 2010 2:47 PM

    You can always show people the "I could care less" English PSA.

    http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1937402

    Very helpful.

    Posted by: Katers at October 20, 2010 2:47 PM

    A phrase does not become an idiom just because a bunch of blockheads start using it. An idiom is a colloquial metaphor (e.g., "battle of the sexes," "kicked the bucket), not simply a statement that might mean something different than its actual meaning. At best, it's a malapropism. The fact that butchered phrases have become more commonplace does not mean that they have to be accepted, like "irregardless" and most of Sarah Palin's vocabulary. It's the dumbing down of culture, folks.

    Posted by: Crash at October 20, 2010 2:48 PM

    Thank you! I hate it when people speak badly! In fact, drunk me (with her lowered inhibitions) is such a grammar bitch that she often gets shut out of conversations. I could (and TOTALLY would) write a weekly (or, more honestly, daily) column on people and their stupid grammar mistakes. First up: I/Me. Here's the rule, people:

    I = subject.
    Me = object.
    SO: When you say, "Me and xxx went to the mall," it's WRONG! Or when you say, "xxx sent flowers to yyy and I," it's WRONG! Here's a helpful tip: Try making it singular. Would you say "Me went to the mall" or "xxx sent flowers to I?" NO!
    Cool Caveat: You should say "xxx is taller than I" because what you're really saying is "xxx is taller than I AM." So it's still a subject! See? Grammar is awesome!

    /regains control of brain.

    Well. Now that we've cleared that up, I feel a lot better. And yes, this is probably one of the audiences that needs this rant the least, but you would be surprised how many well-educated, incredibly smart people out there have serious issues with grammar.
    Next time on Grammar Bitch, we delve into the seemingly complex conundrum that is Less vs Fewer! Spoiler Alert: it's actually mind-blowingly simple!

    Posted by: esme at October 20, 2010 2:49 PM

    Thanks. I agree, this is annoying. My literal-thinking brain is often confused by people who tell me they could care less. I'm always thinking, "So it's possible for you to care less. Is caring less a goal of yours? Something you're working towards?"

    My number one pet peeve is the use of "myself" instead of "me". The HR staff at my office do this constantly. "After you return the forms, they'll be reviewed by Jack and myself. Then I'll call you in and you will be interviewed by Linda and myself." What?

    Posted by: Abby-Wan Kenobi at October 20, 2010 2:49 PM

    Here are a few quick things to remember the next time you feel like bitching:

    1. Communication is difficult. Ideas are complicated and deeply personal, and the ability to coherently communicate those ideas is very, very hard. I have observed that many arguments don't stem from fundamental disagreements (though obviously, many do) but rather from one or both party's inability to properly communicate their ideas.

    Think of is this way. The word "home" means something different to just about everyone. Perhaps you grew up in foster care, so "home" is a word that implies an impossible longing and/or melencholy sadness. Maybe you grew up with loving parents, a cheery joyful family, and all the comforts you could want; and "home" conjurs pleasent memories of Christmas morning and hot chocolate hugs. Maybe your father or mother was an abusive drunk, so "home" is a place to be avoided. Maybe you're gay, and your intolerant parents have exiled you from "home." The word doesn't just mean "house" or "dwelling." It means a variety of different things to each and every one of us, and there is virtually no way to assure that you're accurately communicating your ideas when using the word.

    Communication is challanging. Ideas are complex and unless you're paying close attention, it can be easy to set aside your own ideas while trying to understand somebody else's.

    2. Language is spoken before it is written. Its all well and good to construct a variety of rules when dealing with the written word. And trying to enforce these rules within the context of encouraging conformity (because of rule 1) is great. I'm all for it. If people suddenly started using question marks at the end of statements, we'd all be confused. However, these rules should never stifle communication. They should never hinder clarity, or stunt the growth and evolution of language.

    When my wonderful wife says to me, "I seen a man cross the street today." What she should have said by the rules of grammar is "I saw a man cross the street today." But really, does it matter? Did she fail to communicate her idea to me? No. I understood that a man crossed the street and my wife witnessed it. My wife didn't follow the rules of communication, but she still succeded in communicating. She successfully overcame the challanges of the first rule and explained her idea to me.

    Even though people break the rules of grammar (which are many and complicated) that doesn't mean they aren't communicating their ideas to you. Especially when communication is verbal.

    3. Language evolves. Have you ever listened to the song "Isn't It Ironic" by Alanis Morrissette? If you have, and you're a stickler, then you've noticed that in almost each scenario within that song, the answer is "no." It is not ironic. It is coincidence to be sure, but finding a fly in your soup is not and "ironic" situation. However, as words are used to mean new and different things (even though these new usages may come from general ignorance), the word actually takes on new meaning. The word "gay" used to mean "happy." And then all of a sudden it meant "homosexual." The word "boner" used to just mean "goofy prank."

    The difference between living languages and dead languages is that living languages constantly undergo changes. Latin hasn't changed in hundreds of years; it isn't influenced by changes in culture. English changes all the time and both words and phrases change meaning constantly.

    Fighting against the evolution of new words and/or phrases is like swimming against the tide.

    Posted by: superasente at October 20, 2010 2:51 PM

    I could give a flying fuck.

    Posted by: Cindy at October 20, 2010 2:52 PM

    I want to be clear - I didn't mean that people are actively aware of it's sarcasm when they use the phrase. Obviously most people aren't, and just take the collection of word "I could care less" to mean they don't care.

    What I was getting at is that the origins of the phrase are sarcastic. That's where the phrase comes from. And over time, people stopped even noticing it was sarcasm and now just say it. But this happens *all the time* with language. When people use the word "computer", do they actually think it means "something which computes"? Of course not. The word has lost it's original meaning and now just means whatever we think it means.

    Same with "I could care less".

    Posted by: DamnYankees at October 20, 2010 2:53 PM

    Ooh, ooh! I remember the WORST one. When women refer to themselves as a "cool chic."

    Posted by: Crash at October 20, 2010 2:54 PM

    esme, my mom is an English teacher, and she taught me all those examples you just mentioned. Sometimes I get a little confused and I have to think it through in my head using those tricks.

    Knowledge is fun!

    Posted by: MM at October 20, 2010 2:56 PM

    Big deal. Professional writers have all but destroyed the possessive in this country - refusing to add an apostrophe "s" to names or words that end in "s". Just the other day I saw this sign: "Las Vegas' Best Buffet".

    Sometimes it's fun because I get to read things in my Omar from The Wire voice.

    Posted by: Chuck at October 20, 2010 2:56 PM

    Esme,

    Couldn't disagree with you more. There's no such thing as "wrong" language. Language doesn't have any right or wrong - all it has is meaningul or not, appropriate or not.

    If I say "James and me went to the store", every single English-speaking person on Earth will understand it (basically). So what in gods name does it mean to say it's "wrong"? I really don't get it.

    Posted by: DamnYankees at October 20, 2010 2:58 PM

    Chuck,

    As far as I know, "Las Vegas' Best Buffet" is perfectly acceptable grammar. I'm not sure what's wrong with it.

    Posted by: DamnYankees at October 20, 2010 2:59 PM

    This post reminded me of this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw

    Posted by: The Maximum Leader at October 20, 2010 2:59 PM

    What I want to know is what happened to the "ly".

    Posted by: Cindy at October 20, 2010 3:02 PM

    You know what really burns me up?

    "could of"
    "would of"
    "should of"

    NO! You are spelling it that way because of the way the contraction sounds, but the second word you should be adding there is "HAVE!"

    And I, too, give a fuck about an Oxford comma.

    Posted by: feramones at October 20, 2010 3:03 PM

    I say it. And I'll defend it by calling it an idiomatic expression. It's wrong, but so are plenty of other idioms in English and other languages.

    "Irregardless" is a mash-up of "regardless" and "irrespective" that has had official recognition as a (horrifyingly) proper word since the 1920's.

    My dad insists that "thusly" isn't a word. It shouldn't be, since it would mean "in the manner of this manner", but it's a word, sure as shit.

    My advice: let it go. Decide which idioms YOU will adopt and speak the way YOU want to speak. Judge people as you will, but move the fuck on. If "I could care less" really moves your cheese, then drop some friends--they're clearly dead weight, anyway. Me? I could care less.

    Posted by: ahamos at October 20, 2010 3:04 PM

    I'm with superasente et al. Down with linguistic prescriptivism! English is dynamic and limber, and its richness is due mostly to changes introduced by "low" culture.

    Posted by: sansho1 at October 20, 2010 3:05 PM

    i like saying "i could give a rat's a##" to my husband when we're arguing to mean that i would rather care about some rat's a## than whatever he's babbling about :) it amuses me, at any rate.

    i had to look up the whole "begs the question" issue because i couldn't figure it out. mull over that one: the words in the phrase don't actually contribute to understanding what the whole phrase means. i was going to try to explain it but i couldn't care less about explaining myself. suffice it to say, i finally know the difference between a logical fallacy that tries to prove a point by implicitly stating the point, and a momento of confusion where someone's speech really requires that you raise or ask a follow-up question.

    Posted by: Sinnh at October 20, 2010 3:06 PM

    feramones,

    Considering "could have" is just an idiom to begin with, it's no more logical than "could of". They are both fine.

    People need to accept that languages change.

    Posted by: DamnYankees at October 20, 2010 3:06 PM

    DamnYankees,

    Move the buffet to Buffalo and it's suddenly "Buffalo's Best Buffet" - Why would we treat Las Vegas any differently. Writers have made a grammar change to make it more aesthetically pleasing.

    Posted by: Chuck at October 20, 2010 3:06 PM

    (Please ignore the run-on sentence in my other post).
    So, let me see if I've got this straight (see, THAT'S an idiom), any language is okay as long as it is understood by the listener. I guess we have a populist takeover of the English language by the unwashed masses (that's two) from those pointy-headed libruls (malapropism). Whew, what a relief.
    But does that mean Drunk Hulk isn't funny anymore?

    Posted by: Crash at October 20, 2010 3:06 PM

    Melodie:

    I love you.

    Esme:

    I have been known to walk out of grocery stores with signs that read "15 items or less".

    Crash:

    Someone should take your comment and make it the header for this page. Perfect.

    Posted by: PaddyDog at October 20, 2010 3:08 PM

    Chuck,

    Because when words end with an S, it sounds weird as hell to have an S-stop-S sound.

    Whether or not you like it doesn't really matter. Everyone understands it and it's an accepted convention. It's certainly not "wrong" in any sense.

    It's sort of like how in French if you say "je suis Napolean" you don't pronounce the S, and if you say "je suis American", you do. It's about flow.

    Posted by: DamnYankees at October 20, 2010 3:08 PM

    Also, just pretend there's a question mark in my last post - you get the point.

    Posted by: Chuck at October 20, 2010 3:08 PM

    DamnY,

    If you're not prepared to accept the fact there are differences between spoken language and written language then I suppose we have nothing left to discuss. Not adding the "s" is incorrect - fact.

    Posted by: Chuck at October 20, 2010 3:11 PM

    Too many words up there. Anyhow, somebody wrote the word "boner,"
    and I just wanted to thank you for that. I laugh when I see that word.

    Boner...

    Good stuff, man!

    Posted by: Skitz at October 20, 2010 3:13 PM

    Damn,

    Also think about what you said regarding the sound of S-stop-S. Say "Las Vegas' Best Buffet" out loud.

    Did you say "Las Vegas best buffet" or did you say "Las Vegases best buffet"?

    Las Vegas's Best Buffet.

    Posted by: Chuck at October 20, 2010 3:13 PM

    No, actually, anyone who has a degree in linguistics or has like, ever taken one single linguistics course knows that there is absolutely nothing the fuck wrong with 'I could care less'.

    Jaysus but I hate it when idiots rant about shit they know fuck all about.

    *sigh*

    Posted by: koj at October 20, 2010 3:15 PM

    I have just so much fun reading about Oxford commas on Wikipedia. I don't use them. I was taught not to.

    Posted by: Mrs. Julien at October 20, 2010 3:15 PM

    Too, many, commas.

    Posted by: jen at October 20, 2010 3:16 PM

    Though I wholeheartedly support your logic and am a grammar nazi at heart, I think that there is a much greater sense of ambivalence in the statement "I could care less". The speaker is so ambivalent, he or she does not even give a thought to how much they care. Not only that, but they do not even care enough about the topic to even express the level of which they care. The entire expression is careless. Compare that to "I couldn't care less" which implies that the speaker did indeed take the time to evaluate his or her level of care. In essence, he or she cared enough to thoughtfully decide that it was not important.

    The dictionary entry that makes me cry is enthuse. I dare anyone to construct a sentence in which the "word" is not used as a past participle adjective or for which it could not be replaced with the correct word, enthusiastic (eg: Don't reply--"I am enthused"). This is not a word people.

    Posted by: dagnabbit at October 20, 2010 3:16 PM

    The phrase "I could care less" is clearly a sarcastic one. Wasted article.

    Posted by: Matt at October 20, 2010 3:17 PM

    Just think of all the money we'll save throwing out all of those English textbooks. All of those English majors will have to stay working in retail instead of education. Pretty soon, no one will remember why the Family Circus was ever funny to begin with, what with those crazy kids and their funny sayins'. The Idiocracy will soon be complete!!
    I gess im gonna go on with my bizness now, anyhows...

    Posted by: Crash at October 20, 2010 3:18 PM

    Why certain grammatical and syntax errors piss me off as well, I have to side with supersante on this one. Language is ever-evolving. Does "ever-evolving" need a hyphen? Probably not, but you understand what I'm trying to communicate!

    Plus, Shakespeare made up words...some of which we use today!

    Posted by: Littlejon2001 at October 20, 2010 3:21 PM

    In fact, Chuck, not adding a final S to "Las Vegas'" is not incorrect. It is accepted in written form that way. It's also accepted as "Las Vegas's" should you like to stick with that usage.

    I do agree that there are differences between written and spoken language, but if we're talking about comment threads, chat rooms, instant messaging/texting, then I would not consider the "written" rules as necessary, as those forums are actually just extensions of vocal communication. A book, a magazine article, a sign, subtitles, school papers... those should all follow the rules. Of course, those rules always change.

    Like DY said above, it's about context and clarity. This post seems to be specifically about informal communication, a daily usage gripe. That's where I, and others, take issue with ironclad rules. And generally, what we're all saying is, seriously think about the words/phrases you use before getting on a high horse about it. When it comes to "incorrect" language, we all do it.

    Language, man, it's like a liquid. Just when you think you've grasped it, it slips through your fingers.

    Posted by: RobP at October 20, 2010 3:21 PM

    I've mentioned this before, but as an editor and then a linguistics student, the prescriptive and descriptive sides were always at war within me.
    I decided to stick with prescriptive when editing writing, and descriptive for speech.
    It's the only way my brain didn't implode.

    Also, Robert, I'm with you on the Oxford comma.

    Posted by: MyySharona at October 20, 2010 3:23 PM

    Superlative comments! The way you have presentified your principle points on the fluidness of language besieges me to presuppose my beforehand approach.

    Posted by: Crash at October 20, 2010 3:25 PM

    I can't believe this "could care less" thing is even being debated. What the hell is wrong with you people? IT IS CLEARLY WRONG.

    If your argument is that language changes, fine. I just decided that I'm going to start calling all birds "shiteatingflymachines" and I am going to make sure that no one ever corrects me because they might hurt my linguistic sensibilities.

    Jesus Christ did you all go to Sunflower Day School and finger paint with feces?

    Posted by: Chuck at October 20, 2010 3:25 PM

    Let's have a grammar contest (Lightly Salted, looking at you)! Winner gets to be Grammar Nazi of Pajiba (articles only, comments are your own dumb fault). And how about 20hrs minimum wage per week with no benefits other than (NOT "then", Dustin) bettering the world with your perfect execution of the English language?

    Come on. Give a stay-at-home mom/grammar goddess a chance at a little pocket change! I could so win this.

    Posted by: jen at October 20, 2010 3:26 PM

    I don't think the phrase is used sarcastically or ironically. I believe the "n't" routinely gets dropped from the spoken phrase because it allows the speaker to more easily accentuate the words that convey the idea of not caring, those being "CARE LESS". "I could" is easily combined into a single sound, and more or less swallowed so as not to waste time getting to the point. Then the final two words are given individual emphasis. Eventually, this bled over into written language. No biggie.

    Posted by: sansho1 at October 20, 2010 3:26 PM

    My second year of college, I had to write a 87 page design report on a toy my with four other engineering students. I guess it was the age difference (me at 29, them at...I guess 20) but none of them...not a single one, recognized that if you started a sentence in a certain tense...you had to end it in the same tense. I had never seen this shit before. Who says "I am going to the movies and saw the 'Happy go Lucky Fuckers'". But what freaked me out is how not a single one could recognize this as a problem. Or, my god, for a generation that grew up with computers, who the fuck sends a document to others without spell checking the damn shit first. I am into my forth of five years of school, I have never once received a single document from a fellow student, even if it was supposed to be a "final" draft, that I could pass on to someone else. Texting is killing our culture. It is the only thing I can think of that has done this.

    My other pet peeve is the world "nuclear". Having spent six years in the field prior to college, having supervisors and inspectors butcher that word again and again would always make me imagine working at a McDonald and my boss referring to the fryer as "pants". For smart people, it would always make me cringe hearing it pronounced wrong. Yeah I know now it isn't technically wrong anymore because they changed the dictionaries...

    Posted by: Diablo at October 20, 2010 3:28 PM

    It's got to be the buffet at Paris. The value was great-all you care to eat for 12.99-the food was fantastic, with piles of warm buttery pastries and crisp tasty bacon, but truth be told the people watching midmorning on a Sunday was sublime. Vegas hookups uncomfortably eating together, tables of partiers nursing hangovers, misguided hookers scouting the crowd after being up all night, trophy wives and their bejeweled husbands scarfing food to prepare for one last assault on the tables before the Redeye. If you couldn't see one person who scared you, one person who intrigued you, and one person who just flat out confused you, it had been too long of a visit.


    Wait, what was the topic? Oh, otherwise is a word. Anything else followed by -wise is grounds for a beating.

    Posted by: MRCREOSOTE at October 20, 2010 3:30 PM

    I think the thing that drives me craziest is when people use borrow instead of lend, like "Could you borrow me that stapler?" NO! I might have lent it to you if you weren't so fucking stupid! Someone next to me said that yesterday and I came this close to punching him in the face.

    Also, legit is just a shortened version of legitimate, which I can live with. What I can't live with is making it a fucking adverb. Stop saying legitly, youth of America! You sound like idiots! I caught two of my younger cousins saying it and had to bring the coversation to a halt. After a long, self-righteous explanation, I made them promise to never say it again. I've also done this to coworkers.

    Do they no longer teach English in schools?

    Posted by: KRB at October 20, 2010 3:31 PM

    I forgot to mention this: I taught ESL at a school in Vancouver called CSLI. The letters stood for, wait for it, Canadian as a Second Language. It made all of the teachers twitch. Even Canada as a Second Language would have been better.

    Posted by: Mrs. Julien at October 20, 2010 3:33 PM

    "Could you borrow me that stapler?"

    Who the fuck says this? Please tell me who and where because I want to make sure I never go there.

    Posted by: chuck at October 20, 2010 3:34 PM

    Article was kinda, dull (skipped thru it), but the comments were excellent irregardless of, punctuation and dashes, and what matters' to me and I could have given a crap - - literally and figuratively -- like on the facebook, is that I understand what they are trying to say, so off to netflicks to check on me cue and peace out cool chics!

    (and TrickyHD is out with an ankle on that above attempt at sarcasm)

    Posted by: TrickyHD at October 20, 2010 3:35 PM

    Considering those receiving your message would have no clue what you're talking about, Chuck, using "shiteatingflymachines" would be wrong. Well, not wrong, you can say whatever the flibbertigibbet you like, but you won't be understood. There's no clarity there, sir. You're just confusing the issue, and defeating your own purpose because language, communication, is about being understood. You understand what "I could care less" means and you know what "Las Vegas' Best Buffet" is advertising.

    You've also done a wonderful job of flying off the handle (bet you know what that means, too) and resorting to insults. Now I can just ignore you.

    Posted by: RobP at October 20, 2010 3:38 PM

    Esme,

    Couldn't disagree with you more. There's no such thing as "wrong" language. Language doesn't have any right or wrong - all it has is meaningul or not, appropriate or not.

    If I say "James and me went to the store", every single English-speaking person on Earth will understand it (basically). So what in gods name does it mean to say it's "wrong"? I really don't get it.

    there is a difference between spoken language and writing. the problem is that most people who speak improperly also write improperly. so while it might be fine for someone to say "i seen the man cross the street" to communicate that he or she saw a person cross the street, oftentimes, that person will also write, "i seen the man cross the street." until a person has a grasp of written language, he or she should speak queen's mothalickin' english. that's why the whole "teach kids ebonics" shit was the height of fuckery . sure, let black kids speak blackese (as my dad calls it) so that when they go for job interviews or whatever, they sound like morons. i'm sorry, people don't usually want to hire a person who can't speak properly.

    the people who are saying "i could care less" are, i reckon, not at all being sarcastic. the people who are saying "i could give a flying fuck," are being sarcastic.

    my mother is a copy editor, my grandfather was an english teacher, and my father is a professor. needless to say, i get my grammar and spelling fascism from growing up under their nazi regime.

    "hey mom? where are my shoes at?"

    "they are behind your preposition."

    "dad, how long is the movie?"

    "about 90 minutes."

    (that one is just cruel... was i really expected to say "for how long does the movie run?"!!!???)


    all of that said, "myself" and green grocer's "apostrophe's" make me want to rip off my arm and beat myself about the head and chest with my own damn arm.


    for those of use who celebrate proper grammar and who loved diagramming sentencing, the "language is evolving and it only matters if the person listening understands what the speaker is saying" is like driving a stake through my sparkly cullen heart.

    i routinely argue with the partner i work for about comma placement with respect to quotation marks. i say always inside. he says sometimes inside. we've been arguing about this for 7 years.

    robert i'm with you, buddy. yes on oxford commas, and yes on the difference between en dashes, em dashes, and hyphens.

    and yes, i recognize the irony (whether morissette-style or regular) in never using capitalization when i write comments n shit.

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 3:38 PM

    Jar Jar Binks for President!

    Posted by: Crash at October 20, 2010 3:41 PM

    Chuck,

    Feel free to use any language you want. But no one will understand you.

    There's seriously no point at all in raging against language change. It just happens and there's nothing wrong with it. Why is it for people like you, Chuck, the language conventions of 2010 are the right ones? Why aren't you demanding we go back to the way we spoke and wrote in 1600? I mean, all that we are speaking now is a horrible, horrible corrupted version of Elizabethan English, right?

    Alas, we are bethumped by words.

    Posted by: DamnYankees at October 20, 2010 3:41 PM

    Next time on Grammar Bitch, we delve into the seemingly complex conundrum that is Less vs Fewer! Spoiler Alert: it's actually mind-blowingly simple!

    MARRY ME!

    now i can't wait for this thread to turn into a thread correcting other commenters' grammar on a post about whether or not people write and/or speak poorly. (incorrectly? improperly badly? shittily? fuckeduppedly?)

    HUZZAH!

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 3:42 PM

    1. I used to yell at the screen whenever George W. Bush was on. It's pronounced NU-CLEAR, not NUKE-ULAR. The way you remember this is that if you swap the first two letters it becomes UN-CLEAR.

    2. "Tow the line" vs. "Toe the line." OK, I got this wrong for the first 50 years of my life, because I imagined sailors towing a line of rope to move a barge. I never pictured someone putting their big toe on a line in the sand.

    3. "For all intensive purposes" vs. "For all intents and purposes." Yup, got this one wrong for the first 50 years, too.

    4. Epitome. Cindy Crawford, "That's the Ep-uh-tome of something. That means Eh-pi-to-me."

    Richard Gere. "That is Eh-pi-to-me. I want a divorce."

    5. I finally got my boss to say regardless instead of irregardless. Don't tell him it's a word now!

    Posted by: BWeaves at October 20, 2010 3:45 PM

    "fuckeduppedly"

    I'm stealing this.

    Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 20, 2010 3:46 PM

    Speaking of epitome:

    6. My best friend when I was little was Penelope.
    That's Pen-nel-lo-pee, not Pen-ni-lope.

    7. Hermione is Her-my-oh-nee, not Her-mee-own.

    Posted by: BWeaves at October 20, 2010 3:49 PM

    i'll start:

    for those of US (not use).

    GOSH, ABL. ur sew dum!!!

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 3:52 PM

    lets also pretend that me myself and i closed the italix html tag before i begun my comment.

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 3:54 PM

    nooculear

    Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 20, 2010 3:58 PM

    One of my colleagues today used the word "Irregardless."

    I work as an English language assistant in a foreign country. So does she.

    She teaches shit like this...

    Posted by: coryo at October 20, 2010 3:59 PM

    The problem is this: The more I read it the wrong way, the more likely it is to push out the correct way and replace it in my poor, little, brain. Now, I have to keep repeating "couldN'T care less, couldN'T care less, couldN'T care less" over and over to keep that from happening.

    It used to be, I didn't think twice over "affect" and "effect" and then someone pointed out that people get these mixed up frequently, and next thing I know, I'm constantly have to double check that I used it correctly.

    And yeah, count me in with the sticklers, even if I, myself, am not a grammar nerd. I still think we all suffer when we get lazy about such things.

    Oh, and while we're ranting. I would just like to point out--regardless of what might be in the dictionary currently (I refuse to see if they've caved)--that anxious means you are nervous or have concern about something. It is related to the word anxiety--no one gets that wrong. And yet, AND YET, people use anxious to mean that they are excited and looking forward to something. THAT IS NOT WHAT IT MEANS, YOU FOOLS.

    I feel better having gotten that off my chest. Thank you.

    Posted by: tamatha at October 20, 2010 4:07 PM

    Does this short video help?

    It's got a graph and everything.

    No?

    OK then...

    Posted by: Simon at October 20, 2010 4:08 PM

    If someone says they're "anxious" about something, and they use it to mean excited, and you understood it to mean excited within the context of their overall message -- then "anxious" means "excited."

    Posted by: superasente at October 20, 2010 4:11 PM

    i'm with superasente on this, and i might add, in linguistics, one of the popular schools holds that if a statement is understood as intended it is correct.

    so, if you say something bizarre, like "I could give a flying fuck" and the person understands that you mean "I emphatically don't care" (which in itself is oxymoronic, but an idiosyncrasy of language) then that statement is correct.

    verbal idioms have always become slurry and bastardized and eventually enter norms. it is perhaps a mischievous conspiracy to irritate language stasis enthusiasts.

    Posted by: idleprimate at October 20, 2010 4:14 PM

    Gosh, ya'll be lovin' youse some grammers. Dayum!

    I think the thing about poor grammar that drives us English major types crazy is the same thing that drives environmental scientists crazy when people say that the Devil buried all the dinosaur bones to test our faith. Grammar is our bailiwick, recognize! We believe that making sure that i is before e or using the subjunctive mood properly is an indication of refinement and intelligence.

    Fortunately, there aren't a whole lot of idiots out there who have learned to write bizarrely stupid shit with all the commas in the right place. If they ever do, woe unto us all for then they will have created stealth stupidity.

    Irregardless, I could care less. [tagged for ironical sign-off]

    Posted by: professor_love at October 20, 2010 4:15 PM

    Yes, and very yes.

    Another peeve of mine-
    Me: Do you mind if I have a seat?
    You: Yes.
    Me: Bitch, I was being polite. I couldn't care less (see what I did there?) if you mind or not.
    You: What? I meant yes you can sit here.
    Me: Well how about you answer the question I asked?
    You: [mockingly] Well how about you pull your head out of your ass?
    Me: I would, but they've grown rather attached since my days in the Grammar-Police Academy.

    Posted by: ThunderSacTriumph at October 20, 2010 4:24 PM

    I think that the main reason why people get so confused about grammar and word usage, is that in US public schools grammar is really only taught in elementary school. I took a grammar course in college. Most of my classmates had last studied grammar in third grade. The level of grammar taught in third grade is rather simplistic. If you last had a grammar refresher 30 years ago, I don't expect you to remember all the rules. I promise not to belittle you nor to make you feel stupid. That is just mean.

    Posted by: androstarr at October 20, 2010 4:24 PM

    Oh my god, it's actually "For all intents and purposes."?!? I feel like an idiot.

    And even though Oxford claims "disrepect" can be a noun informally, I'm not having it. Too many memories of Jerry Springer shows where people screamed "He's disrespecting me!" before throwing chairs at people's heads.

    Posted by: Vee at October 20, 2010 4:25 PM

    Let's see, with Jar Jar Binks as President, he most certainly would have Sarah Palin as his VP. Drunk Hulk could be Secretary of State. DRUNK HULK NOT GET WHY MIDDLE EAST CALL THEMSELVES MIDDLE EAST. THEY SHOULD CALL THEMSELVES MIDDLE CENTRAL! Why, even George W. could come out of retirement as Secretary of Education.

    Wait, call Fox! We could have reality shows where people compete to invent new words of their own choosing. Phone-in contests could determine new grammar rules. English classes could turn into speaking-in-tongues practice. "Mydoggyhimandmegotostorebuggitybuggityblah!" Wow, I'm Nostrafreakindamus.

    Posted by: Crash at October 20, 2010 4:28 PM

    I agree that "I could care less" as it is used by most of the ignorant public is annoying, but it's not the one that annoys me most.

    The one that makes me want to punch people in the face is one I've seen only in advice columns (Zombie Dear Abby/Ann Landers, Miss Manners) and as such comes exclusively from women. They're asking about some bullshit drama concerning their wedding and will typically open with something like this:

    Dear Advice Columnist:

    I am being married in a few months ...

    Jesus Tapdancing Christ, please tell me they don't teach you people this shit in school now. For those who don't see what the problem is, there is no such (correct) phrase in English as "I am being married."

    You're GETTING married, dipshit. You'll BE married after you GET married.

    Goddam ...

    Posted by: Slash at October 20, 2010 4:42 PM

    I get paid to correct people's written English. As most of them are trained in some aspect of written expression, I don't see too many heinous things. I'd hate to be an English teacher. I don't correct people's speech. I don't get paid to do that.

    RE "I could care less" meant as sarcasm: No. I have never, in 44 years, heard anybody say this sarcastically. It's always said with contempt or anger and clearly meant to express that the speaker cares so little about X that he/she literally could not care less. Most people leave out the "not" part. This isn't an alternate idiom, it's fucktardedness that got passed around like some stupid urban legend and now half of America says it because they've never heard/read it used correctly.

    English is apparently very idiom-heavy. That's cool. But before you use an idiom, learn the actual words. Don't use the wrong words and then act like an asshole when someone tells you they're wrong. Here's a reasonably useful site: http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/

    "For all intents and purposes" isn't on there, though.

    Posted by: Slash at October 20, 2010 4:58 PM

    My, my, my! We are getting testy. But consider that language is at best slippery. I tell my students that if they want answers, go to the mathematicians. But for English, it's all about questions.

    Please don't let's be so damned right about things. Even about words like preventative and irregardless.

    Posted by: Jerry Kenney at October 20, 2010 5:00 PM

    i find it fascinating that the same commenting masses who like words like "godtopus" and coinages like "rainbow killer", the same commenters who giddily emulate mentally deficient cat picture captions, the same commenters who gibber over any photo of a male or female movie star who isn't depicted as open on a morgue slab, these same commenters have such an extreme and raging level of discomfort with anyone who takes language precision a mote less seriously than they do that they are ready to throw down and declare a pogrom.

    I would love to parade in a lordly fashion about the room, proclaiming my superiority in the fierce arena of colloquial speech, but I am an english canadian and we get more points for the near gymnastic ability to understand even the most mangled english and to deftly apprehend obtusely mixed metaphors.

    i suppose these are the same commenters who can ret-con a raped childhood whenever the media recreates something they remember before the recreation has even managed to deviate from their cherished memories.

    aw, i'm just poking fun, I could care less, but only slightly less before the care meter dropped to zero.

    Posted by: idleprimate at October 20, 2010 5:01 PM

    aw, i'm just poking fun, I could care less, but only slightly less before the care meter dropped to zero.
    Posted by: idleprimate at October 20, 2010 5:01 PM

    HA! I see what you did there.

    Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 20, 2010 5:07 PM

    Everytime I hear my manager state "alls I know is" I die a little inside.

    Posted by: Beckells at October 20, 2010 5:20 PM

    "ir" is not a preposition, it's a prefix.

    I was prepared to listen to your argument until I saw that mistake. If you’re going to be a stickler, get it all correct.

    Posted by: Nikolai at October 20, 2010 5:34 PM

    I think we should all agree to just say "I don't give a shit".

    Posted by: figgy at October 20, 2010 5:37 PM

    I think this boils down to Grammar Nazis vs. Language Lovers (I don't use "Nazis" in the pejorative, seriously, it's a self-imposed title).

    One side seems to believe that rules are rules are rules, ignoring the history of language entirely. Someone here, I believe DamnYankees, asked, why is that side so hung up on grammar circa 2010 and not 1600? Indeed. If you're really set on language being fixed, you ought to be speaking English, here and everywhere, like Hrothgar spoke to Beowulf. Good luck being understood.

    That isn't to say you can't be a Grammar Nazi and a Language Lover. Honestly, I'm both. I'm a proofreader by profession, so it isn't like I don't understand your passion for the rules. At my job, a grammatical error could literally (yes, I mean "literally") cost someone millions of dollars. To a lesser degree, I bristle at every I see a typo in a favorite author's novel. I get it. But, like we've been trying to say, it's about context. Spoken language doesn't follow the rules.

    And, yes, over time, the rules of written language change to match contemporary spoken language. If you want to fight it, that's your business, just know that it's a losing fight.

    Posted by: RobP at October 20, 2010 5:40 PM

    And I second figgy's motion on the floor.

    Posted by: RobP at October 20, 2010 5:41 PM

    117 comments (118 after this)? Really? God-fucking-damnit*, I love this site (you fucking grammar Nazis). Fun fact: my friend got "corrected" by the teacher on an English paper in high school for saying "couldn't care less"**. This solidified my understanding of this phrase.

    * - So, D-Bag says it is dammit, whatever.
    ** - I know, I don't follow conventional quotation mark rules.

    Posted by: pissant at October 20, 2010 5:44 PM

    as someone who has worked as an editor and a proofreader, do the angry folk recognise any slight difference between written language, formal documents etc., and spoken language and the relaxed nature of informal internet chat?

    i like saying "ain't". I rarely write it unless in the context of dialogue in a fiction where it is contextually appropriate, or at times i say ain't in type on comment forums or a blog if it is specifically for the purpose of creating a conscious sensibility about a narrator.

    that being said, i meet people who say ain't because it is what they know to mean am not, or are not. i can't think of any reason to get riled up over this. I know what they mean. And i get an indicator as to how best to address them in response. academic folk don't even accept "proper" contractions, so where does 'aren't' fall in the grammar nazi lexicon?.

    Posted by: idleprimate at October 20, 2010 6:13 PM

    It's odd the things that set us off. For me, it was never really this phrase, but the spelling "rediculous". Having some light sprinkling of Latin background, every time I see this word I go slightly insane.

    English is just a terrible language for any kind of accuracy though. It's the linguistical Borg, and just as aesthetic. I've become somewhat Zen with it, although I think the change over time has made it less beautiful (when used artfully) than it once was.

    -Frob

    Posted by: frobme at October 20, 2010 6:15 PM

    ** - I know, I don't follow conventional quotation mark rules.

    That's how I do it too, pissant. The quotation is not "couldn't care less end of sentence". It's "couldn't care less". The Brits have that one right (or better, if you prefer).

    Posted by: sansho1 at October 20, 2010 6:18 PM

    RE figgy: I think we should all agree to just say "I don't give a shit".

    That's my preferred idiom. Or: "I don't give a rat's ass."

    Posted by: Slash at October 20, 2010 6:28 PM

    pedantic, condescending, pretentious; i love it.

    Posted by: caroline at October 20, 2010 6:35 PM

    somewhere, someone is conducting a masters thesis on the randomness and disorderliness of internet thread "debates". no doubt reaching into anthropology to reason out the lack of continuity.

    i think constantly(when on pajiba) of commenters like superasente, yossarian and sansho19, (among others who don't leap immediately to tongue but who are appreciated) who forward thoughtful ideas in well thought out prose only to be absolutely invisible in the onslaught of whatever mood is taking place in a thread.

    Posted by: idleprimate at October 20, 2010 6:44 PM

    English is the linguistical Borg. Love it!!

    Posted by: MM at October 20, 2010 6:51 PM

    I am loving how worked up people are getting over this. Really, it's the best thing about English; all these rules that no one follows, people getting pissy about the most specific little detail that they choose to follow. On a site where comments on book reviews rarely make it to the double digits, the fact that this rant has over a hundred comments is hilarious to me. It's wonderful.

    I would consider myself a language lover, first and foremost, and a grammar Nazi, fascist, nitpicker, and snob after that.

    For those of you who agree with me - it's nice to have a place where we can just bitch about the similar things that annoy us, isn't it? Esme, Mrs. Julien, MelBivDevoe, logar, stopthemadness and many others - thanks for the supportive comments. I'm so not cut out to be an internet writer, because every time someone calls me an idiot, I die a little inside. And now that I've let that nugget of information loose, I expect to see at least 50 comments saying exactly that following this post. Hurrah.

    For those who disagree - thanks for sharing. Apparently we're going to have to agree to disagree because you ain't changing my mind (see? I can do it too!), and I'm clearly not changing yours.

    Just a couple of things I'd like to mention:

    1. To everyone who thinks of language rules as dynamic, loose, and flowing (which, I agree, they are, to some extent), and think that mutual understanding is the only end goal - what is your opinion when people pronounce nuclear, "nukular"? You know what they mean, right? Maybe it will make it into the dictionary in 10 years (which - kill me). That doesn't make it correct.

    If you don't care, then touche. But if you do - what makes that different from "I could care less"?

    2. Comparing "I could give a fuck" to "I could care less" doesn't work, and here's why: "giving a fuck" does not mean the same thing as, or even anything similar to "caring less." They actually mean the exact opposite of one another. Therefore "I could give a fuck (but I don't)" works fine, while "I could care less (etc)" does not.

    and

    3. I actually checked with two professors of linguistics at Carleton U, and they both told me that the phrase, while idiomatic, was not technically used correctly by most people. So call me an idiot if you'd like, tell me I don't know what I'm talking about (I'm no expert - I wanted to major in Linguistics or English but, as a combined honours student in journalism and psychology with minors in biology and classical civilization, I simply did not have the space), but please don't think I pulled this out of my ass at 3 in the morning. I mean, I did, but after that, I ran it by the profs. So, give me a little credit.

    Yes yes, I know. tl;dr. Whatever, I haven't slept in 28 hours and I wrote a midterm an hour ago. I do not care about summarizing right now.

    Posted by: dsbs at October 20, 2010 6:52 PM

    If someone says they're "anxious" about something, and they use it to mean excited, and you understood it to mean excited within the context of their overall message -- then "anxious" means "excited."

    when i'm interviewing potential associates, if someone were to say "i'm so anxious about going to lunch with you," i would discount that person as either an idiot or as a nervous nelly and not recommend hiring him or her.

    that's why speaking correctly matters.

    point is: if you keep saying something incorrectly, you're probably going to say it and write it incorrectly at the incorrect time and likely end up in a correction facility because you can't find a ding dang job.


    also, if one understands proper grammar and sentence structure and shit, then one can use it improperly for comedic effect, verily.

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 7:10 PM

    Aww, idleprimate just made me blush. I now feel properly unappreciated! :)

    Posted by: sansho1 at October 20, 2010 7:12 PM

    I think we should all agree to just say "I don't give a shit".

    can we agree to supplement figgy's idea with "I couldn't give a shit" for the constipated among us?

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 7:13 PM

    "Everyone knows and complains that our internet-addicted, instant-messaging culture is bringing about the destruction of the English language"

    Everyone may certainly complain, but I seriously doubt if the Internet's actually killing English. Idiots and children and idiot children have always existed and they always will, but before the Internet you never really saw much of them. What the Internet has done is make them more visible, and more clustered. It's not fair to blame a so-called decline in education or language on the Internet simply because that's where you see most of the incorrect usage.

    Rules are there to be played with for enjoyment. They're not there to be broken, but even if they are, you have to know what they are first.

    That means that when language changes to make up new words or rules, i's evolving, but when people are "adapting" language for "ease of usage" (i.e. being lazy fucks), i's de-evolving. If you were to see in a newspaper, "The Queen rofled when she heard the news," you might cringe, but replace "rofled" with "chortled" and you'd be fine, right? Maybe not in 1872, which is when Lewis Carroll first used it.

    Posted by: zomgmouse at October 20, 2010 7:21 PM

    I'm sure that when we reach the future, as depicted in Blade Runner, our descendants will talk in Cityspeak. Any good cop will have to know the language.

    Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 20, 2010 7:29 PM

    "Idiom's frequently disregard grammatical or semantic rules, and ... if the phrase is understood by the intended audience, it is said correctly, regardless of grammar rules."
    Posted by: Ruth at October 20, 2010 2:34 PM"

    I believe you mean disregardless.


    Posted by: Odnon. at October 20, 2010 7:31 PM

    arrgh. english is robust because it easily acommodates difference and adopts change.

    I can say, i was foogling some boggles of christina hendricks and quickly membled my crootchies, and you know exactly what i am saying. there are a shitload of languages you can't do that in.

    same way i can say "I am to take an exam yesterday and am fairing poorly now wish you would once give someone guidance" and in english, someone gets that. In another language, its goop.

    celebrate our flexibility instead of pouncing on irregularities.

    sheesh(or whatever the dictionary equivalent is)

    Posted by: idleprimate at October 20, 2010 7:32 PM

    "correctionAL facility."

    stoopidhead.

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 7:33 PM

    "I seriously doubt if the Internet's actually killing English."

    It's true. Y'all's are on your own.

    Posted by: The Internet. at October 20, 2010 7:42 PM

    I can say, i was foogling some boggles of christina hendricks and quickly membled my crootchies, and you know exactly what i am saying. there are a shitload of languages you can't do that in.

    i would hope, however, that in a job interview you would say, "i was ogling a pair of well-apportioned breasts belonging to one Christina Hendricks, and, as a result, i prematurely ejaculated--prematurely--in the crotch area of my pantaloons."

    we are all intelligent people having an intelligent and playful discussion. we can all play loosy goosy (loosey goosey?) with the rules of grammar and language. but there are people who don't understand the rules and therefore do not have the wherewithal to play such trite games, and i'll be good and fucked in my eye socket before i let a bunch of assholes continue to foogle some boggles and memble their crootchies ad nauseum, until the point at which crootchies becomes an SAT word.

    ::stomps foot petulantly::

    (to be clear, i do not now, nor have i ever thought that idleprimate is an asshole or a bunch thereof.)

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 7:43 PM

    Things that drive me crazy? How about "New York eats it's young." Seen on actual shirt sold by HBO (linked to Bored to Death or some show I haven't seen but strangely in the True Blood store). http://tiny.cc/xs8uj Really HBO? No one in your advertising or design department saw a problem with this???

    Posted by: clarity at October 20, 2010 8:00 PM

    prematurely prematurely?!

    yikes.

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 8:04 PM

    Substitute the missing 'not' with the word 'be' and the phrase becomes 'I could be careless.'

    Posted by: Odnon. at October 20, 2010 8:07 PM

    @stop the madness

    you're killing me, seriously killing me.

    i won't fight the suppression of 'foogle' but neither will i become frightened by the evil hi-jacking of language that has occurred on the internet. instead, i will exercise my overlord privilege and either absorb difference or deny it.

    Posted by: idleprimate at October 20, 2010 8:21 PM

    and I will utilize every available opportunity to masturbate, or as we say in the new language, create again, without worrying if the plebeian gamma class understands. the greater good of ejaculation outweighs the smaller loss of individual language.

    which pajiban is with me on that? and no one is allowed to say they couldn't give a shit.

    ouch.

    i pass off the ball to the bonobos.

    Posted by: idleprimate at October 20, 2010 8:35 PM

    several bonobos jump for joy. . .this guy is going offline to watch quest for fire.

    pish tosh on you all/

    Posted by: idleprimate at October 20, 2010 9:16 PM

    Stephen Fry has some choice words about this.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY

    Posted by: Kiddo at October 20, 2010 10:44 PM

    idleprimate, have i seriously killed you yet?

    how did i do it? please tell me it was with an icicle that melted. i've always wanted to kill someone that way.

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 20, 2010 10:46 PM

    I'm an attorney. I'm not a legal genius, but I do pride myself on my prose. I was a doctoral candidate before law school, a writing instructor, edited a book, and was editor-in-chief of my journal. Again, not a genius, but I do know how to put a sentence together.

    There's the backdrop. I'm still an associate and, as many of you may be, am still subjected to my superiors' edits. It's fine - I like constructive criticism. I'm a little stuffy about certain things, though, and chafe at erroneous edits - particularly for shit that goes out under MY name.

    Do not make the following edits:

    1. Las Vegas's to Las Vegas'. The latter has become correct, the former is more correct. I wouldn't say shit to somebody about the latter, but I'll be damned if I'll consent to a correction of the former.

    2. Ditto "comprise." Please don't change "A salad comprises lettuce, tomatoes, and cucumbers" to "A salad is comprised of lettuce, tomatoes, and cucumbers." I know the latter feels more comfortable and is technically correct. The former is more correct and should stand.

    3. Memoranda, fora, etc. - all proper plurals of singular nouns. I know memorandums and forums are recently correct, but it doesn't mean they replace the always-correct.

    Posted by: samantha t at October 20, 2010 11:11 PM

    I think that if you are educated in a certain style, you may have difficulty communicating with some people. I find generational gaps are just as frustrating as language (foreigners with English as a second language) barrier. And then there are the "local dialects". ALL valid forms of communicating and yet sometimes I just want to stab someone when they say some of these "hot" phrases completely seriously. *pulls out hair*
    "I know you can be overwhelmed and underwhelmed, but can you ever just be whelmed?"
    " I think you can in Europe"
    This is the kind of logic that leads to these battles!

    Posted by: DeckOfficer!! at October 20, 2010 11:18 PM

    Heh, I know lots of people who got a BJ from Carleton. Probably because they gave me BA there. Bugger All.

    Posted by: raoulduke at October 20, 2010 11:35 PM

    I heard of a reporter who thought famous and infamous meant the same thing, like flammable and inflammable.

    I understand they settled the libel suit.

    Posted by: , at October 20, 2010 11:55 PM

    THANK YOU! The misuse of that phrase irks me to no end. It's frustrating. Yes, fRustrating, not fustrating. Grrr!

    Posted by: Az at October 20, 2010 11:59 PM

    The thread has gone elsewhere since, but the guy saying this phrase originated as sarcasm is correct. It has the flow, style and feel of the sarcastic Yiddish sayings that so pepper their language.

    Imagine the stereotypical old Jewish grandfather saying this is a thick Bronx Jewish accent. Go ahead, do it. Makes sense now, doesn't it. Got it? good.

    People who decry the "sanctity" of the English language fail to realize (or simply forget) that English is the redheaded step child of languages. It also happens to be a living language. Words and phrases are subject to change depending on their popular usage.

    Get over it.

    Posted by: Lennon at October 21, 2010 1:14 AM

    Thank you! This is one of my pet hates- please do LOOSE vs. LOSE next, I can't believe anyone over the age of 8 still gets that wrong.

    Posted by: Tina at October 21, 2010 1:14 AM

    "He seems to be favoring his thigh."

    "Uh oh, looks like he's got a groin."

    Posted by: Recondite at October 21, 2010 1:36 AM

    This is way too much posting for grammar. I have to say I agree with superasente. This is language, it is not set in stone, it changes. The changes do not end, and will not end. The problem you should be railing against, is not lack of knowledge of rules that constantly contradict themselves. But general ability to write/speak effectively. With some time I can write fairly eloquently, but I still manage to mess up tenses, and other such things. Get over it people.

    Posted by: e at October 21, 2010 2:05 AM

    e, you lost me after the second comma splice.

    Posted by: stopthemadness aka Angry Black Lady at October 21, 2010 2:48 AM

    it is interesting!

    Posted by: like sky at October 21, 2010 3:04 AM

    it is interesting!AND i know more interesting site---------sugarmommadate.>

    Posted by: clover at October 21, 2010 3:07 AM

    i know i am late to the party but "let's get down to brass tacks".

    makes me want to stab the person who said the phrase with a brass tack. Do they even MAKE brass tacks?

    Posted by: blacksred at October 21, 2010 8:36 AM

    Wow! The Grammar-Nazi article got 3 x more comments than the schoolgirl article did!


    WHATS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?

    Yeah I left the apostrophe out, ON PURPOSE!

    Posted by: logan at October 21, 2010 8:37 AM

    This is my favorite grammar site.

    http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html

    Posted by: Poptart at October 21, 2010 8:58 AM

    I love it so much that I could literally care less about this article.

    Posted by: Tamara at October 21, 2010 9:42 AM

    Blacksred - that's a completely valid idiom. Not the same as a grammar error.

    Posted by: samantha t at October 21, 2010 11:26 AM

    Me! Me! I'm with you! This has always bother me. I make people correct themselves all the time. I ask them to repeat what they just said like I didn't hear them, when I really did hear them. And I keep asking until they change it. That may make me an asshole for not just out right telling them, but I don't care.

    Of course, I'm no expert when it comes to grammar or spelling, but every time I see a word abbreviated in a text or in an email or whatever, my brain wants to exploded.

    Also when stuff is spelled with Z's, or when people take out just ONE letter of a word to "abbreviate" it.

    I do spell words or phrases phonetically if there's a particular part I want pronounced in a specific way. Not to be taken seriously like that douche at the spelling be last year (or was it this year?) that wanted to change the way EVERY word is spelled. She wants to make everyone spell all words phonetically. And get this, she's a teacher! What the hell is that about?

    Posted by: Candee at October 21, 2010 11:57 AM

    Your argument is that, "I could care less," is the worst of the mistakes because it says the opposite of what it means. You also argue that it is the worst because there is no logical reason for the mistake to be made, unlike, "irregardless."

    Saying the opposite of what you mean is one definition of irony. Surely you don't mean that irony is a mistake, and a horrible one. "I could care less," seems likely to have come from an ironic statement, like saying, "yeah, right," when you mean, "No. Wrong. Idiot."

    But the sarcastic tone of such statements is somehow absent when people say, "I could care less." Perhaps it was lost somewhere along the way. And many people don't even realize the statement is ironic when they say it, so it's understandably frustrating. But there is a logical source for the error, and it's a better one than for "irregardless."

    Posted by: eko1980 at October 21, 2010 6:09 PM

    Kinda dumbfounded that people here are arguing that "I could care less" is grammatically correct.

    Of course it's grammatically correct. It's a clear statement that the narrator could care less about something.

    As a turn-of-phrase it's incorrect for the reasons given. The rant isn't about grammar as much as it is about people's ability to think before they speak. Or even after.

    And no, sarcasm is a cop out. It's almost never sarcastic. I've never heard it used sarcastically. I can bend my ear and make it sound that way, but that's not its usage at all.

    Posted by: Protoguy at October 21, 2010 6:51 PM

    There is never a time when mentioning that one could possibly wear less clothing is not an option.
    A fun option.

    Posted by: Kelly at October 21, 2010 7:04 PM

    I'm with you. Well, I used to be. This phrase used to bother me a great deal. Except. "I could care less" could be used correctly and in the way that most people use it if you fill in the implicit preamble. As in "I care very little about [insert noun], but I suppose if I were coerced, I could care less." The subject isn't the least care-worthy thing in the universe, but it's pretty close. As opposed to "I couldn't care less," which is almost invariably hyperbole.

    Posted by: YLlama at October 21, 2010 11:58 PM

    Oh! I thought I must be the only person who cares about the Oxford comma! I was taught to use it in elementary school, and have continued to use it in my writing for at least 25 years since then. (Now I am wondering if some pedantic Wichtigtuer will point out that I should refer to them plurally since I have, in fact, used more than one Oxford comma during the course of my life.)

    I teach high school English and German classes, thus exposing myself (ha ha ha) to a much wider field of possible irritants of language usage. Misused apostrophes are definitely at the top of my peeve list. I actually carry a thick, black marker in my purse so that I may personally correct the hand-written signs that hang in places such as the Dollar Store, or other similar dens of illiteracy. For crying out loud, if you WORK in "The 99 Cents Store", then you should recognize that "cents" needs no apostrophe when it expresses the price of the onject upon which the sign hangs! I dare any employee to scold me for writing on their signs with my Sharpie. For then, like Zorro, I shall mark my initial upon his or her (not their) chest before I stride away triumphantly.

    What I also hate with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns is when people use "myself" as the subject of the sentece. For example, my mother showed me an e-mail she recently received, which included the sentence, "John and myself are so glad to hear you will be enjoying our park." First of all, it is WRONG to call yourself "myself" when you should use "I". "Myself am glad to hear..." sounds stupid. Second, the word "enjoying" is not equal the word "visiting". How does he know she will enjoy his park? Who told him so? Does he really think she is so mentally weak that she will become a victim of the power of suggestion and enjoy it just because he implied that this was already a foregone conclusion?

    In my German classes, I teach as many as 180 students per semester. One of the very first things they are taught (mind you, "they are taught" is not the same as "they learn") is the German alphabet, as it differs from English in pronunciation and because it has four additional letters that are not used in English. I tell them specifically that one spelling error for which I will subtract points in their written work is using a "B" or a "b" when the ß is required. That letter does NOT MAKE A "Buh" sound! It makes a "ss" sound! I can understand why they would assume that the B should be used if they have had no prior exposure to the ß AND had not been warned upfront not to make this mistake. The shape of the letters is somewhat similar. But I TOLD THEM NOT TO DO IT! Furthermore, putting a lowercase "b" when you mistakenly believe that a "B" is the same thing as an ß means that you are not only dumb, but also too lazy to capitalize the thing you thought that letter is!

    The amusingly sad (sadly amusing?) thing that I discovered is that no matter how my English speaking students butcher their own language, they are always quick to laugh at the things their peers in other countries say or write. Last week I gave them a list of German texting lingo ("lol" and such) so they could compare their own abbreviations to ones that Germans use. So to those who believe the Internet is "ruining English", you can take some cold comfort in knowing that it is presumably ruining other languages too, not only English.

    Another student habit I struggle to break is their tendency to translate incorrect English usage word for word into German, resulting in something that makes even less sense in its German form. In German one asks "Wie geht es dir?" (How goes it for you?) to ask a friend how his or her day is going. The correct answer should employ the SAME VERB: "Es geht mir gut." The subject is ES (it), not YOU or I or even ME. "IT goes well for me." In English they would reply, "I am good" (which is wrong to begin with). No, you "are" not "good", and you may not, therefore, say in German "Ich bin gut" when asked how your day goes. The verb deals with IDENTITY. Unless your photo is included in the dictionary next to the definition of the word "good", then I have contempt for you saying that you are good. The question did not ask about YOUR BEHAVIOR or HOW YOU FEEL; it asked HOW IT IS GOING FOR YOU.

    Back to English peeves, as I just remembered one more inaccurate word choice that always causes my grammar hackles to rise. I am bothered when others use the word "excruciating" to describe their pain. "I stubbed my toe, and it was excruciating." No! It was not! This word means your pain was exactly like being crucified! Unless you have personally been nailed to a cross and hung out to rot in the elements, then you are not entitled to say you have experienced excruciating pain. This is only acceptable when you are intentionally exaggerating to attract attention. It is not okay to use this word when you are merely commenting that your pain is bad.

    Es lebe die Sprache!

    Posted by: Analiese at October 22, 2010 4:00 AM

    Thanks for this, Donna.

    RE our internet back and forth from a few months ago, I'll accept your apology now, Mr Rowles.

    Posted by: Carlos at October 22, 2010 7:11 AM

    What I find ironic, or "ironical," is that a lot of people who agree with you about the whole "I couldn't care less" idea, use apostrophes in the word "its" at every juncture. The only, and I mean ONLY, time an apostrophe is used in the word "It's" is when it is a conjunction for "it is" or "It has". But people these days seem to think that the pronoun "it" needs to be possessive, as in "it's handle," or "it's reason for being." Wrong, wrong, wrong. Hasn't ANYBODY ever used the word "its"?

    Posted by: Christian at October 22, 2010 4:02 PM

    Hi. I just noticed that your blog looks like it has a few code problems at the very bottom of your website’s page. I’m not sure if everybody is getting this same error when browsing your blog? I am employing a totally different browser than most people, referred to as Opera, so that is what might be causing it? I just wanted to make sure you know. Thanks for posting some great postings and I’ll try to return back with a completely different browser to check things out! London,UK

    Posted by: ovidiu gravura at October 22, 2010 6:10 PM

    I'm on the derived-from-sarcasm side. My guess is that people used to say it "I could CARE less" (implying, "As if I could care less"), and it morphed into the intonation we (well, some of us) use now.

    This just doesn't bug me the way "irregardless" and "between you and I" do. And don't get me started on its/it's.

    Posted by: cinderkeys at October 23, 2010 12:35 PM

    No one can seem to agree on whether the Oxford comma should be employed. Standards seem to change based on nation and publication in question. I was taught that as a general rule it should be avoided, except in cases where it would relieve ambiguity and especially when one of the items on a list is already joined by an 'and'.

    I can't say anything about this topic though, as I'm almost criminally lazy about proofreading my internet comments.

    I hate 'Can I help who's next?'.

    Posted by: Jo 'Mama' Besser at October 23, 2010 8:10 PM

    Although most commenters chose to step over it, I agree with the sarcasm angle. It provides the most rational explanation for the development of the phrase, "I could care less", out of the possibilities set out above.

    That being said, you can claw the ranting pen from my cold, dead hands before I take advice from an American regarding the Queen's motherfucking English.

    You pricks lost it when obligate was sanctioned by some dumb motherfucker.

    Posted by: Peter G at October 25, 2010 2:33 AM

    Hi, this blog is very usefull and i like this blog so much.i'll share this blog on my facebook page.

    Posted by: dasdasdasd at March 1, 2011 12:32 AM

    You made a few fine points there. I did a search on the issue and found nearly all persons will have the same opinion with your blog.

    Posted by: zero friction marketing at March 3, 2011 5:44 AM

    You made several fine points there. I did a search on the matter and found the majority of people will agree with your blog.

    Posted by: zero friction marketing at March 7, 2011 8:47 PM