Something I've noticed on American TV and I think sometimes Wiretap, using the word "with" without an object, as in: "Want to come with?" [..me?"] "Why don't you come with?" [...us?"] With the tonal emphasis falling on "with".
I first heard that from my then-23 year old boyfriend in 1989. He was a wanna-be hipster, I think.
"Want to come with?" .... "Why don't you come with?"
This isn't really that new. It's slang coming from teen speak circa late 90's to early 2000's. If you want to blame tv for bringing to the forefront blame Buffy the Vampire Slayer. They used it quite a bit on the show. Well at least enough that when I read this comment I heard Buffy's and Willow's voice speaking the words.
I first heard that from my then-23 year old boyfriend in 1989. He was a wanna-be hipster, I think.
Really? Really?? I've never, ever heard it before this year.
We've got to get this thread settled so that we can move forward.
At the end of the day, absolutely.
[url=http://www.lssu.edu/banished/current.php]Lake Superior State University's Annual List of Banished Words[/url]
FAIL
I find this one to be getting really old. A lot of people I know use it in unpleasant ways like "I am so fail" "That is fail"... that was the point at which I started getting sick of the word.
That list also included "A-Ha Moment"....
And yes, that is another phrase that needs to be taken to the vet and put down...unless we agree that, as of now, everyone is obligated to acknowledge they're having such a moment by bursting into a chorus of THiS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djV11Xbc914
for me it's the term "best practices" as in "we use best practices" it just sounds so incorrect.
also, way too many people put "obviously" in front of every answer.
and i still can't stan "pwn" it's not a word and you can't even say it, it was a typo! it either should be spelled how it is said or said how it's spelled.
I find this one to be getting really old.
That "getting really old" phrase is, like, so last year.
Why do people say "back in the day" when they are referring to some time in the past?
"Back in the day" came out of hip-hop culture, IIRC. It probably spread as (once again)white people imitated black speech in order to pretend that they were "phat", rather than "wack".
1. It’s the economy, stupid.2. A week is a long time in politics. Or variants thereof, such as, “If a week is a long time in politics then a month seems an eternity.”
3. What part of x don’t you understand? Although this one seems to have nearly died out already.
4. Way beyond, or way more.
5. Any time soon.
6. “Events, dear boy, events.” (Except as the name of an excellent political blog, currently in abeyance.)
7. Learning curve.
8. Raising awareness.
9. Celebrating diversity.
10. In any way, shape or form.
11. Inclusive.
12. Community, especially a vibrant one.
13. Hearts and minds.
14. Celebrity.
15. Makeover.
16. Lifestyle.
17. Going forward.
18. A forward policy.
19. A big ask.
20. At this moment in time....
etc.
I'm guilty of using "raising awareness", "celebrating diversity" and "vibrant community" in past arts funding proposals :-)
"He gets it. It was definitely an 'X' moment for him."
"Oh really? I am so not going there."
"At the end of the day..."
(to which I always cut in and reply..."the sun goes down".)
"the 7 year old little boy" - mostly female anchors use this phrase, albeit a term of endearment, but I can tell you for sure that 7 year old boys really hate being called "little", and it sounds stupid.
When he hurt himself badly but didn't cry or fuss at all, I called my son, then 7 years old, a "brave little soldier" ... and he turned around to his Mom and said "Dad called me a brave big soldier".
---
Also in the title to this thread, and my personal weakness, are SPOONERS. I believe these are where the first syllables in words in a phrase are switched, for example, "I have to take a shit" becomes "I have to shake a tit".
The story of the origin of spooners that I heard was that Reverend Spooner, from the 17th C., had a brain that did spooners all the time, involuntarily, and he was fired because of it. It can be a dyslexic type of curse to some people.
When done on purpose, spooners are a form of humour lower than the pun, or toe I've been sold [many times]. Cheap laughs for smot pokers and other dimly witted fools.
You want spoonerisms? You don't know from spoonerisms!
Spike Jones - The Man on the Flying Trapeze
There used to be a running segment on a german comedy show called "Kentucky Schreit Ficken' (Kentucky Screams Fuck) which was basically an endless stream of spoonerisms:
Cool, Spike Jones spooners! The other video is all German though, about how Kenfucky Tried Chicken, and Ken Tried Fucky Chicken.
Q: when is lewd language not lewd? A: When it is a "spewed looner" ; [lewd spooner]
It seems that only part of it needs to make some sense, but at least it should have the same rythmn as the original phrase.
Usually spooners just trade first syllables with first syllables of other words, but it can be more convoluted:
eg. - When is off-coloured language not off-coloured language? When it is an "off-spunard cooler" [off-coloured spooner]
Spontaneous spooners are best:
While watching hockey this winter my dyslexic girlfriend named the visiting team as "the Chiblago Cock Hogs".
OKAY, ENOUGH!!
Ok, but just one more, saving the lest for bast:
Supposedly, when CBC radio first went on the air coast to coast so many years ago, the excited announcer bellowed out:
"This is the Canadian Broadcorping Casteration"
That would have been impossible, although I've heard a Super Blooper track with the line, "The Canadian Broadcorping Castration" before.
Impossible? Why yes, as I believe the first CRBC announcers used to say "This is the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Commission."
Why not?
Maybe I'm hanging around with computer/tech. types more than I used to, but I keep hearing problems referred to as "issues."
Worse yet: Calling a problem a "challenge".
Politicians and talking heads who want to say something frequently preface their statements, "Let me just say..."
I've noticed a trend towards verbalizing nouns - e.g. "let's workshop that idea" or "we need to solution that proposal".
"Osama bin Laden" and other bogeyman watch phrases and terms. Thank goodness people don't have to be unsulted by that Orwellian watch phrase anymore. Now that Elvis bin Laden has been martyred among oil industry magnates, warfiteers, the CIA, ISI, MI6ers and that other intel agency manned by prolific slackers, Mossad, perhaps now they will get on with the business of creating a new public image for al-Zawahiri, another of their former business partners turned bogeyman.
At the other end of the spectrum, "obsessive-compulsive" isn't used nearly enough.
The Obama Administration insists that it is not engaged in a "war" in Libya but, instead, is engaged in a "limited kinetic operation".
Ya gotta hand it to the US military. That one's a doozy; right up there with calling a steel nut a "hexiform rotatable surface compression unit," and invading Grenada as "Caribbean peace forces" involved in a "predawn vertical insertion."
Or, as George Carlin noted, "The pentagon actually measures nuclear radiation in something they call sunshine units."
Yeah, it's enough to make you want to engage in an involuntary personal protein spill.
"Low-hanging fruit" has to be one of the most facile clichés out there these days.
"Be that as it may" - to any amount of evidence one is staring in the face - we're simply going to continue doing what we've always done, because we remain unconvinced.
"Low-hanging fruit" has to be one of the most facile clichés out there these days.
Don't think i have ever heard that one, and I'm not sure I want to guess and give myself away.
THough the first think it makes me think of is a killer P J Harvey song
I've noticed a trend towards verbalizing nouns - e.g. "let's workshop that idea" or "we need to solution that proposal".
Or if one can do something about a problem, it is "actionable."
I want to kill whenever I hear Pollyanna Tremonti or Lord Michael Enright say, "...listen to this piece of tape."
For one thing, the recorded clip is probably digital, and for another, if you take a piece of tape, hold it in your hand, and put your ear next to it, you might hear the ocean, but not much else.
Substantive, especially when the material being discussed isn't.
re "piece of tape".. "footage".. as in "We have footage of blah blah blah." No. No you don't. You have a digital file on a disk drive. No footage here.
But the one that has annoyed me for a l-o-o-o-ng time: every accident is tragic. Every sad or unfortunate event has become "tragic".
Orwell was right, (but left actually), the language has become utterly degraded. In fact, I often find myself saying things are "double double plus ungood" and find no one knows what the hell I'm talking about. Strange.
But opportunities for irony abound. I often say "that's incredible" when hearing some nonsense. No one gets it. How about "that's fantastic" along the same lines.
And another thing; stop saying "divizzive" when you mean "divisive."
Yeah, unless someone's boinking his mom, one should step back from calling just anything "tragic."
One word that's also thrown about carelessly these days is "divide," as in "He's creating a divide in the crew." Unless one is referring to the drainage basins of major river systems, or making a figurative leap, "divide" is a verb. "Divsion" is what one might create by one's behaviour.
Re: some of the last few complaints, I think some of you need to invest in some better coffee. Personally, if I heard someone using the word "tape", it would make me feel warm and nostalgic inside. It's a generational thing. These guys probably started their careers in the era of tape. They've earned that right. ;)
Generational? Phht, I remember when Philips compact cassettes were an innovation.
There are all kinds of anachronisms like that. How about dialing a phone number? And while typesetting used to be an anachronism we still talk about leading between lines. And I still occasionally hear musical releases referred to as "records" - even ones that aren't offered on vinyl.
It's not quite the same. You can listen to a tape (or a record, or a CD) or a tape recording, but you don't listen to "some tape" or "a piece of tape."
By the way, I call CDs "records" on the air all the time.
Word. Records ≠ Vinyl. Vinyl = Vinyl.
'Course, my general feeling is that the last few "posts" are fetishizing the literal a bit much.
"Records" predates vinyl anyway, as the first records were made of shellac mixed with other materials.
My quibble isn't so much over the "literal" meaning of what's said, as much as it is with pointing out that the technology used (or not used) isn't necessary. After all, you might say, "I'm going for a walk," without finding it important to mention "in my sneakers."
Pollyanna and Lord Mikey could just as easily say "Let's listen to Mr. X" as "Let's listen to some tape of Mr. X talking."
Except that you would never extend that to calling a physical CD a record. It is definitely an anachronism.
I say all those things too. There is no word for leading other than leading, even though they are no longer built up with strips of lead. And "keep your powder dry" is still relevant, even though the technology is hardly used anymore.
But they are definitely hangovers, and a reminder of archaic, if not obsolete, technology (like shutterspeed when there is no shutter) that we don't often think about.
Except that you would never extend that to calling a physical CD a record.
Wanna bet? To me, CDs are just small shiny records.
Fine. You win.
THough I have never heard anyone say "put that record in the boom box".
(edit)
Come to think of it, someone, somewhere may have referred to a CD player as a "record player" but I have never heard it.
Well, to take the word "record" literally would mean that any recording of anything is a record. So that would include CDs, tapes, digital files, but also photographs, film and written documents.
But actually, as I think of it, would it really include digital files? Because, technically, digital files are a representation of information from a recording that must then be retranslated into a simulation of the recording. The information in digital form without the translating technology is meaningless and is not the record itself, nor even a copy of the record. Whereas analog recordings are a direct copy of the recorded event, not a simulation that needs to be retranslated into recognizable information. Not sure if this is true, just thinking aloud.
Fine. You win.
THough I have never heard anyone say "put that record in the boom box".
(edit)
Come to think of it, someone, somewhere may have referred to a CD player as a "record player" but I have never heard it.
I win? I didn't know I was in a contest. Hey, I was just visiting; I didn't realise I was in an argument.
I sometimes call my brand-new eyepawed a "gramophone" (maybe you heard me say this on the show last week), or a "squawkbox," and every once in a while I refer to the CD players at the station as "record players."
The record players I often call "turntables."
I was just responding to the offer of a bet. And no, of course it wasn't serious. No worries.
After the last NDP convention, I'd argue that "Capstick" is now one of the most hated words on the Canadian left.
