Mumsnet Talk

I don't like the way I heard inaccessible being used.

The book was inaccessible to the child. Now did this mean that the book was on a high shelf or locked away in a cupboard, or did it mean that the language was too difficult for the child to read? To my pedantic mind it's the former, but I am quite sure think the latter was what was meant.

I hate "irregardless."
It's not a word, the word is "regardless."

I also hate the way my broken keyboard frequently means I lose all the "b's" and "g's" unless I give them a proper pounding.

Another thing I hate is the Australian "youse," such a vile thing, and so very prevalent here. Worse is when it's said "yewz." <shudders>

OK, well while we're at it, may I point out how much I hate, hate, HATE the term "one-on-one" time? Another irritating Americanism.

Latine loqui; nulla esset opus praepositio omnino.

People at work regularly use "reach out to" when they mean email, ask or contact. I am not sure if they use "reach out to" to imply that they are trying to open a dialogue or just to annoy me.

But, but, but American's don't like me saying "angry with"...because they say angry/mad at.

Grandma - 'Claire and I are meeting on Monday' - please, no 'myself'! All wrong.

ThIs is one of the many reasons I am thoroughly unemployable. If an adult asked me to 'reach out' outwith the context of my having fallen down an unused mineshaft, I would be obliged to stab them.

Should they then mention that anything was 'comprised of,' I'd stab them twice.

"Meet with..." is a common expression in the US, as well as "speak with..." Until I read this thread, I didn't know it was unacceptable in British English.

I used to have a problem with"meet with" but over time I have grown comfortable with using it as meaning "have a meeting with" because "meet" on its own just sounds inadequate. Eg " we will meet John and Fred next Tuesday" just sounds like we have never met them before, whereas " we will meet with John and Fred" conveys the sense that we will sit down round the table with them. I also feel that "we will have a meeting with John and Fred" sounds rather over- formal, as if they had done something wrong and we must have a meeting with them to bring them to boot.

However this American "reach out" bollox is doing my head in - a US lawyer recently emailed, " I have reached out to John and Fred to set up a meeting". It sounded like he was setting up a support group! Also just gets me singing that song- "Reach out....iiii'll be there, to love and comfort yoooou".

celticlassie

At least that's not as bad as "do lunch".

It's unexceptional if it's followed by an abstract noun: for example, from "If":

"If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same"

It is unnecessary verbiage in British English if it's simply about meeting a person, and so counts as poor usage. It is the opposite of formal!

"Revert" is however a long standing Civil Service and military usage.

Our solicitor keeps reverting to us, or asking people to revert to him. It sounds as though he thinks he used to be me.

Talk with, yes American. Trying to sound inclusive and friendly I think.

oops, I mean 'and me'. I think.

<runs away confused and muddled>

It should have been 'with me, surely?

I am mostly baffled by 'revert' and 'coordinate' used in odd ways.

All very much popular business phrases at the moment, my personal hatred is for the use of "revert" as in "Please check the changes Bob has made to your document and revert to myself".

Sounds like I'm supposed to change it back to how it was before...... And there's that pesky "myself" again.....

"You all want to rip your eyes out now, doncha?"

Yes.

It should have been, "...and I..."

Which brings me to 'reach out to' my current most hated Americanism.

"If Wilson could reach out to Grey, and then meet with Grandma to speak with Mittens and myself..."

You all want to rip your eyes out now, doncha?

No, in Brit English, we speak to even if it is collaborative. On the phone, one asks to speak to someone, not with them. It's an Americanism to "speak with" people.

Unless letseatgrandma, you winced at, "myself and Claire," where it should have been, "Claire and I..."?

Yes; it was the 'myself and Claire' that upset me!

To add to the last post:

Unless letseatgrandma, you winced at, "myself and Claire," where it should have been, "Claire and I..."?

"I heard someone say 'myself and Claire are having a meeting on Monday' earlier today which made me wince!"

Can you explain what is wrong with that? It sounds perfectly acceptable to me (if they were meeting to discuss some particular issue or item with the intent to progress the situation are achieve an outcome; if they're just going for coffee and a catch up, no).

From here

"'I will meet with you' does imply a number of things: it implies that it's quite formal; it implies that it's very professional reasons and it implies that somehow, we're going to collaborate on something ...and that it will go on for quite a long time."

That's how it sounds to me: this will involve a meeting, as the BBC link says, 'a collaboration', as opposed to, "I will meet you at the phone box on the high street."
 
 
 
As bad as 'speak with'

It's 'speak TO'!

To me, 'speak with' sounds (again) more collaborative or inclusive; 'speak to' sounds like someone's going to be lectured or told off.

Ooh, yes that one annoys me, too!

I heard someone say 'myself and Claire are having a meeting on Monday' earlier today which made me wince!

Or have 'a lunch'. NO! Have lunch.