Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Other subjects
Original poster

Pedant Party: Any Annoying Word Misuse Lately?

74 replies

NotQuiteCockney · 03/01/2007 13:21

I was reading Julie and Julia over the holidays, and found it mostly very good. However, at one point, she uses the term "triage" to mean "perform first aid", rather than it's proper use. Grrrr. The original meaning is useful and distinct from "patch something together".

What misuses have annoyed everyone else lately?

OP posts:
DarrellRivers · 03/01/2007 17:50

marvellous thanks
now just have to remember that phrase with the a and the e the right way around

Twiglett · 03/01/2007 17:51

your very welcome .. no chance you could explain rein and reigns then?

Twiglett · 03/01/2007 17:52

your .. who's up in arms about that then?

MrsBadger · 03/01/2007 17:52

Affect is the verb - 'Manufacturing costs can affect the price of carpets'
Effect is the noun - 'In the last year, manufacturing costs had no effect on the price of carpets'.

Effect has also got a bunch of other uses but that's the most-used one.

lemonaid · 03/01/2007 17:52

As a verb:

affect means ?to act on? or ?to move? (His words affected the crowd so deeply that many wept) or, in another sense, ?to pretend? or ?to assume? (The new students affected a nonchalance they didn't feel).

effect means ?to bring about, accomplish? (Her administration effected radical changes).

As a noun:

affect (with the stress on the first syllable) is a technical term in psychology and psychiatry and isn't used in normal (non-specialist) speech or writing.

effect means ?result, consequence? (The oil spill had serious effects).

caffeinequeen · 03/01/2007 17:59

Please may I join?
Mrs Badger - I listened to the Word of Mouth prog too - but then Matt Harvey started talking about a "pacific" word instead of a"specific" one! So I switched off.

caffeinequeen · 03/01/2007 18:01

Oh and Darrell - tis easy to remember if you think of "affected" people, iykwim.

MrsBadger · 03/01/2007 18:08

caffeine, he was doing it on purpose!

He slipped in loads of misusages - I was driving at the time and kept shouting at the radio (sorry to anyone I inadvertantly cut up on the Heyford roundabout).

AlienEars · 03/01/2007 18:14

Sainsbury's website selling stationAry products...

GrumpyOldHorsewoman · 03/01/2007 18:15

Did and done being used the wrong way around. i.e I done my homework before I went out. Grrr. DH and DD being the worst culprits.

amicissima · 03/01/2007 18:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
NotQuiteCockney · 03/01/2007 20:17

Oi, I use the term "flat affect" all the time in casual conversation.

Ok, not with everyone, but with a few of my friends.

Amicissima, I waver about "they" in place of he/she. I mean, yes, obviously, it's wrong, but I'm not happy about that whole lame "oh, 'he' is gender-neutral". No it bloody well isn't.

OP posts:
Quootiepie · 03/01/2007 20:21

This is all me... I need to go back to school. Im going "eh?" at some of these

onlyjoking9329 · 03/01/2007 20:32

ok i am rubbish at this sort of stuff. I don't really get spelling and stuff.
but can someone tell me if the following is correct
John Andrew's report.

Original poster
NotQuiteCockney · 03/01/2007 20:33

That's fine.

OP posts:
Original poster
NotQuiteCockney · 03/01/2007 20:34

It takes a "'s" because it is possessive - the report belongs to John Andrew.

Oh, wait, is his name John Andrews? Or John Andrew?

OP posts:
onlyjoking9329 · 03/01/2007 20:35

His name is John Andrew.

Original poster
NotQuiteCockney · 03/01/2007 20:38

If it's "the report of John Andrews", then it's "John Andrews's report" or possibly "John Andrews' report". I think the second looks better, but I've found better online cites for the first.

OP posts:
Original poster
NotQuiteCockney · 03/01/2007 20:38

Ah, fine, good. Keeps it easy.

OP posts:
onlyjoking9329 · 03/01/2007 20:49

Today i went into my DD school which is a special needs school, whilst helping out i was asked to laminate some target sheets one for each child, so one the sheet it says
for example
Joe Smith's targets.
it didn't look right to me, but as i am rubbish at this sort of stuff i didn't question this, but it has got me thinking!

Original poster
NotQuiteCockney · 03/01/2007 20:51

No, it's fine.

Do you understand why it's fine? I can point you at some good web explanations, or try to explain here?

(If you're puzzled by a construction, and wanting to know if it's valid, there are always loads of pedants here who would be happy to help.)

OP posts:
onlyjoking9329 · 03/01/2007 21:05

is it because the target belongs to the person? i don't really understand it but i remember M&S making a bit of a boob on something very similar , that's why i questioned it.
thanks for your help.

Original poster
NotQuiteCockney · 04/01/2007 08:03

Yes, the apostrophe indicates possessiveness.

I think the M&S blunder was something like "fishe's food" or something equally strange.

OP posts:
yajorome · 04/01/2007 08:18

Jura, I recently read something in which the soldiers were decimated. Putting it mildly, decimation was used as a quite harsh form of military discipline. Wikipedia entry here

Thrilling, yes.

Ok - back to your pedantedness, everyone....

blossomhill · 04/01/2007 08:29

Your instead of you're. See that a lot.