RSS

Note to Chris Matthews

 

"Hardball" host

 

I'm a big fan of yours; but your comment today about "less wars" is off the charts.

 

Wars aren't quantities like water, oil, and gas. You should have said "FEWER wars".

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 22, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

“this here” vs. “that there”

 

Location is obvious.

 

We have here one of the dumbest redundancies in the English language when you hear people say such things.

 

"This" is ALWAYS "here", and "that" is ALWAYS "there".  The words "this" and "that" are locational references.

 

Nobody ever says, "this there" or "that here". So what's with the dumb-sounding redundancies?

 

Once again, this always makes the speaker sound stupid.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 22, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

Cooking Verbs & Redundancies

 

The ridiculous language of TV foodie people

 

How, when, why, and by whose authority did these food-prep terms become acceptable and commonplace…?

 

– chop UP

– cut UP

– mince UP

– slice UP

– saute UP

– bake OFF

– reduce DOWN

– cool OFF

– heat UP

– stir UP

 

What in the world do "up," "off," and "down" contribute to the action? They're simply directional words; not verbs. Why not "sideways"?

 

…and these words become necessary? The alternative seems to be obvious!

 

– blend TOGETHER [blend apart?]

– separate APART [separate together?]

– rise UP [rise down?]

– combine TOGETHER [combine apart?]

– reduce DOWN [reduce up?]

– bind TOGETHER [bind apart?]

 

Beyond that…how can anybody dare to call their work (food or otherwise) "the ultimate"?

 

The notion of browning beef (steak, roast, or otherwise)  to "sear in the juices" has already been debunked by people who really KNOW. It doesn't sear in anything.

 

We're obviously living in an age of unmitigated bullshit and verbal ignorance. How can poisonous and/or inept people become admired celebrities vis a vis Food Network "stars"? Their words become our cancer…creeping into our own vocabulary and daily chatter.

Blather poses a danger to our language health.

 

 

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 20, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

Double Negatives

 

Front & center in a new NFL commercial.

 

One of the basic tenets of grammar is the avoidance of double negatives; but they are featured in a new television commercial for the National Football League(NFLShop.com)…"I don't need no money; I don't need no fancy shoes…."

 

We all know that some of the worst grammar on television occurs on weekends during collegiate and professional football games — by commentators, as well as by interviewed players. But to have the NFL pay big money to produce promotional commercials with obviously bad grammar is shameful.

 

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 18, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

National

 

It's a three-syllable word.

 

The spelling and pronunciation should be no mistake…"national" — not "nashnle".

 

"It's revolting to hear this word mispronounced — reduced to two syllables — especially by a snooty-sounding Brit spokesman for a car-rental brand.

 

If somebody wants to butcher our English words, that comes with freedom, I suppose. But hearing a major corporation approving the butchery and supporting it with millions of advertising dollars is unconscionable. Let's leave their cars on the rental lot!

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 16, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

The Peculiar Brits

 

Our English Standard

 

I continue to be mystified about why our British friends pronounce some basic English words in their own peculiar way. They add a syllable that isn't there, or they delete a syllable that is. Examples:

 

military…"millitree"

aluminum…"aluminium"

 

Is there something spooky going on under the earth's surface that makes them do this? It's so difficult knowing how to speak proper English when our creators are mucking it up. They're our language role models; so this is very disturbing.

 
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 14, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

Comrades…Comaraderie…Comeraderie

 

Where does the additional syllable come from?

 

My basic, logical brain tells me that the word "comrade" should naturally be extended to "comraderie" or "comradery" — not "comARaderie" or "comERaderie". Where does this "AR" or "ER" come from? I know that "ER" is a lovable movie space creature — or was that E.T.? — and also the title of a television series; but why is it a syllable in a word that doesn't merit or require another syllable?

 

It seems extremely goofy to me.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 12, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

“issues” vs. “problems”

 

They're not the same!

 

It seems that the term "issue" or "issues" has become a fashionable substitute for the word "problem" or "problems". I hear it all the time. Most often when a sports commentator is talking about some player's injury. They always say that the player has a "shoulder issue" — or "issue" with some other part of the body. WRONG!

 

The player has a physical PROBLEM. The only "issue" is how to deal with it…how to solve the PROBLEM.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 11, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

“I was like…”

 

The airhead cancer!

 

The word "like" exploded onto the American scene via a TV culture of "Valley Girls" in the 1980s. But to hear a man in 2011 use the term, when talking about something, is revolting.

 

That airhead expression is still being used in television commercials for major brands, as well as news interviews with teens and clueless adults.

 

What does "like" contribute to the description or discussion? NOTHING. Anyone who talks like this gets slotted into my file as an AIRHEAD…ditzy, shallow, and too lazy to use good English. 

 

Once again, Hollywood comedy efforts have left a big cancerous stain on our language.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 10, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

“premise” vs. “premises”

 

This is a repeat of an August 27th post to correct an oversight on one word…thanks to sharp-eyed reader Adam.

Notice to dumbasses of the world!

 

These are two of the most commonly misunderstood words in the English language; they're even used incorrectly in trade publications — by "professional" writers and editors, as well as on signage. The difference is very simple, so there should be no confusion.

 

The wrong usage…dumbass example:

                                           

premise A proposition upon which an argument is based or from which a conclusion is drawn.

 

premises 1. Land and the buildings on it.

          2. A building or part of a building.

 

The word "premises" is not a plural for "premise." Get over it…get with the program! Smarten-up your language skills — editors and everybody else!

 
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 9, 2011 in Uncategorized