Premier Rock Forum

tmidgett

it's an issue of attention and understanding

Well, did you ever think for a second that I might not be able to diverge my whole attention because I am at work? Lord forbid I make a grammerly mistake and mess up the accounting work I am doing just to make sure I don't draw the ire of some nameless, faceless bbs posters.

But, I divest, this is probably one of the most simulating boards out there and regaurdless of my blatant mistakes I value everyone's opinions and respect that they have individual thoughts and original ideas. Cheers Y'All.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:

kerble wrote:Or were you giving this thread some malaprops BRW?

I actually heard people use the non-words "laxadaisical" and "obliviated" in Chicago last weekend.

I would go see a band called "obliviated".

cprlcoffee wrote:But, I divest.

cprlcoffee wrote:I might not be able to diverge my whole attention.

I divest!
Diverge my whole attention!

This is just too good to be true.

Super salad? = Soup or Salad?

Was it on this board that I once read the sentence "I resemble that remark"?

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:

cprlcoffee wrote:But, I divest.

cprlcoffee wrote:I might not be able to diverge my whole attention.

I divest!
Diverge my whole attention!

This is just too good to be true.

I'm pretty sure cprlcoffee is naked, and twain.


Salut! cprlcoffee, is all just the fun shit talk! None to offense.


Faiz

ginandtacos.com wrote:"irregardless".

while irregardless IS actually a word (it's in the dictionary), it comes along with this note:

Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.


i don't think i know of any other words that are "condemned" as not being "real words"


(ps - spellcheck picked it up as a mistake)

the one that makes me want to hammer rusty nails into ignorant tongues....

it's asterisk NOT asterix...it's lazy phonology i reckon, which has evolved into a malapropism

my nan, on hearing a famous opening tune for a TV cartoon..."Oooh, is that The Symptoms" - three guesses...

floog wrote:my nan, on hearing a famous opening tune for a TV cartoon..."Oooh, is that The Symptoms" - three guesses...

and i take the first two guesses don't count?

‘Don’t condone me just because I said. . .’

Someone mistakenly used ‘condone’ instead of ‘condemn’ on this board not long ago.

Malapropisms don’t bother me terribly, but glaring ones do affect they way I read or listen to someone – particularly in the context of argument or debate.