Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I have a coworker that says "You know what I'm saying" at the end of every sentence.

Every. Sentence. "Yes, I know what you're saying. We both speak English."

Flip it around, and just assume that he isn't talking rhetorically

If you ask him to rephrase everything he says it might change his speech pattern. Or he might punch you

Either way it's entertaining.

I like ending sentences with....'If you know what I mean?" on occasion.

It makes even mundane things seem vaguely naughty, even when they aren't at all.

"...no pun intended." is another good one to tag to random sentences if you want to break brains.

Another one that annoys me a fair bit, that I see a lot of: phase and faze are different bloody words that mean completely different bloody things, but people don't seem to know this and use them interchangeably...

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/faze-phase/

Quick round up for our English chums tonight.

1. Penalty
2. Extra Time
3. Corner.

Best of luck to the lads (no, genuinely!)

 Dysartes wrote:
"...no pun intended." is another good one to tag to random sentences if you want to break brains.

I enjoy replying with 'That's what she said,' to things that are in no way an inuendo.

I prefer the classic Finbarr Saunders “Fnarr Fnarr”, even when whatever was said couldn’t possibly be a double entendre.

I used to enjoy using '...as the bishop said to the duchess...' out of context because it annoyed the crap out of my wife on account of not making sense and also being a mauling of the usual phrase.

 Easy E wrote:
I like ending sentences with....'If you know what I mean?"

Depending on your accent, it might also make you sound like Ernest P. Worl.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I prefer the classic Finbarr Saunders “Fnarr Fnarr”, even when whatever was said couldn’t possibly be a double entendre.

My favorite's "nudgenudge, winkwink, say no more".

Crispy78 wrote:
Another one that annoys me a fair bit, that I see a lot of: phase and faze are different bloody words that mean completely different bloody things, but people don't seem to know this and use them interchangeably...

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/faze-phase/

So would I be wrong to say I got hit in the face with a tetrion particle cascade and it didn’t even phase me?

I don't know, but would certainly be awkward... :p

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

Crispy78 wrote:
Another one that annoys me a fair bit, that I see a lot of: phase and faze are different bloody words that mean completely different bloody things, but people don't seem to know this and use them interchangeably...

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/faze-phase/

So would I be wrong to say I got hit in the face with a tetrion particle cascade and it didn’t even phase me?

No, since you should've used anyon particles. That would have phased you.

People as my work like to say 'learnings'. The word is lessons

Like "That TV show is a good 'watch'", instead of "I enjoyed 'watching' that TV show".
Or, "I am going to for 'eats'" in place of "I am going out to get something to 'eat'".
Adjectives are not verbs*, and so many already have proper words to use.
Dived instead of dove (He dove in). Shooted, not Shot.

*I get language terms muddled up, due to a lack of the relevant education in that area, and a lack of enthusiasm to learn it later. Maybe after this.
[There you go, nouns. Need more coffee]

I don't think you will win with "watch" in particular, that ship has well and truly sailed. Watch has been used as a noun for decades if not centuries, especially in military settings.

I found that when I went to look it up. It just seems to have become more prevalent in the past few years.
Or I recently noticed it, and it's been a thing forever and I missed/ignored it.

 Skinnereal wrote:

Dived instead of dove (He dove in).

That one's a regional thing. 'Dived' is older, and more common in British English. 'Dove' is a more recent addition, apparently created for consistency with 'drive/drove' and is more common in America. Both are considered correct usage.

 Haighus wrote:
I don't think you will win with "watch" in particular, that ship has well and truly sailed. Watch has been used as a noun for decades if not centuries, especially in military settings.

While true. . . and writing as a military vet. . . I'm not buying that people are using watch the same way. Like saying "that show was a good watch" is definitely not using the word in the same way as "hey sailor, who's on watch right now?"

Personally, I've only started noticing this incorrect use of the word watch, with the rise of streaming becoming, IMO, the main source of television entertainment. I don't know if there's something in people's heads that broadcast TV shows and streaming TV shows seem to require a different noun/verb for viewing, but I have coworkers who do both streaming and OTA tv still, and they use different terms when discussing their momentary experience.

 insaniak wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:

Dived instead of dove (He dove in).

That one's a regional thing. 'Dived' is older, and more common in British English. 'Dove' is a more recent addition, apparently created for consistency with 'drive/drove' and is more common in America. Both are considered correct usage.

Of course, English being what it is, when one refers to the method of execution 'hanged' is more accurate than 'hung'.

Can’t find the vid now, but I watched a genuinely interesting and informative and thus educational video on African American English.

And it went into the roots of that dialect and why it does make sense in terms of the various European languages influencing at a certain shameful and horrific time of the world, and how it shaped a now modern dialect.

It does make good, genuine sense.

Still won’t stop me cringeing when a social media account clearly run by a fellow Pasty Git uses it, but as someone with an interest in the evolution of language and dialects? It corrected me somewhat.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Can’t find the vid now, but I watched a genuinely interesting and informative and thus educational video on African American English.

And it went into the roots of that dialect and why it does make sense in terms of the various European languages influencing at a certain shameful and horrific time of the world, and how it shaped a now modern dialect.

It does make good, genuine sense.

Still won’t stop me cringeing when a social media account clearly run by a fellow Pasty Git uses it, but as someone with an interest in the evolution of language and dialects? It corrected me somewhat.

Sounds like PBS’ Other Words show; they’ve certainly done an episode on African-American dialects anyway.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
Of course, English being what it is, when one refers to the method of execution 'hanged' is more accurate than 'hung'.

Specific cases will always exist. 'Hanged' is probably stuck from when it was last widely used. Hanged/Hung may have moved on, but hangings have (generally) stopped happening and the term stayed back there.

"Unregard" is a popular one in my workplace, although most of the people who use it are mocking the few people who use it unironically.

"Declare-tion" is one that a prominent person uses instead of declaration, that gets me a bit.

Think I moaned about this one before. But…gritty, specifically when used as an adjective to describe a piece of media.

Now it does have its place. It should relate to say, a Police procedural with a focus on slightly dramatised realism. A show which demonstrates the toll police work can take on the investigating officers, how easy it is to go too far etc.

But it’s just so bloody overused. Overused to the point it’s now a warning that the writers have just applied a blue filter over crap scene lighting and everyone is gonna be miserable and pointlessly antagonistic with no redeeming features.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Think I moaned about this one before. But…gritty, specifically when used as an adjective to describe a piece of media.

Now it does have its place. It should relate to say, a Police procedural with a focus on slightly dramatised realism. A show which demonstrates the toll police work can take on the investigating officers, how easy it is to go too far etc

So something like A Touch of Frost then

I overuse of filters is 100% a problem for some shows. I recall watching trailers for Twilight and my gods did they go nuts with the blue filter. It's not a subtle hint its full on colours are bonkers wrong.





Also as its been mentioned, I love A Touch of Frost. It's also one of the very few police dramas that actually has more than one plot/crime at once. Its still refreshing to see a police detective solving several within one episode where sometimes they didn't link up at all save that they were all things Frost had to deal with. Of course one was always the most major; but it struck me as a level of realism that you rarely see in a lot of other police detective dramas

I for some reason cringe at the use (and especially overuse) of the word 'sheer' in writ, and started noticing how much fantasy authors make use of it as if it does anything but water down the impact of whichever word follows -literally-.

I mean, as an etymologist alone this word is the equivalent of being hit in the face with a wet rag.
In what way is anything such as force or impact ever 'clear' (as to which this word sheer is employed)

The sound aswell has me wish to steer an F1 car off a high bridge.