| 6:39 pm on Oct 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Personally myself ...
| 8:20 pm on Oct 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
| 10:42 pm on Oct 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
cut and paste
|historical sources shows that from whence has been common since the thirteenth century. It has been used by:- |
Defoe (in the opening of Robinson Crusoe: “He got a good estate by merchandise, and leaving off his trade, lived afterwards at York; from whence he had married my mother”),
Dickens (in A Christmas Carol: “He began to think that the source and secret of this ghostly light might be in the adjoining room, from whence, on further tracing it, it seemed to shine”),
Twain (in Innocents Abroad: “He traveled all around, till at last he came to the place from whence he started”),
and it appears 27 times in the King James Bible (including Psalm 121: “I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help”).
So what literary genius says "from whence" is wrong ?
< Note: - quote is from [worldwidewords.org...] >
[edited by: tedster at 3:14 am (utc) on Oct. 27, 2008]
[edit reason] attribute the quote [/edit]
| 12:29 am on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Let's not loose our tempers over this...
Published references are comprised of many opinions on both sides...
Just my two pet peeves, these.
| 6:24 am on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|So what literary genius says "from whence" is wrong ? |
I used the word redundant. Redundancies permeate the language. Who hasn't heard "free gift" overused on infomercials?
Sometimes these phrases have a pleasing sound. Sometimes the user is just naturally wordy. Maybe the user has just heard it over and over and thinks the words must be joined. For whatever reason, it's still a redundancy.
Haha, jdmorgan. It's somewhat amusing when someone writes that someone else is a looser. Makes me wonder who the real loser is. :)
| 9:48 am on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I get really annoyed by print (or online) adverts that haven't been properly proofed.
And I heard a major news program (could be BBC but prob C4 News) call something a controversial controversy. Seriously.
| 10:59 am on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I don't worry about figures of speech. All the figures out there speech and we are stuck with it. Have been since the 12th century. Life is too short to worry about some of the foo out there.
| 11:13 am on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Nevertheless, many costly mistakes could be avoided if people would take just a little more care with there wording and phrasing...
| 11:16 am on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Life is too short to worry about some of the foo out there. |
Personally myself I definately worry from whence that opinion came. I am not however about about to loose the plot over it.
| 12:09 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
i dont understand y peeple dont lern to speek/rite proper like what i do
| 2:15 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|some are even found on WW |
I wander if from whence this cauld be the originations of the Friday Word Game.
On a personal note, I tend to miss the 'H' key on a consistent basis. It's annoying, but often easily spotted and corrected. Often, but not always.
| 3:03 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
>>Anything on the web, in print, or otherwise common usage get your attention
Try and rather than try to always gets my attention. Affidavid appears to be pretty common, Google doesn't even offer a "did you mean affidavit".
One I'm guilty of in informal writing is 'alright", which is never right. Then there's 'beckon call' for 'beck and call'. Dribble instead of drivel, exasperate when the writer or speaker means exacerbate...
'ATM machine' makes me nuts.
I could go on...
[edited by: digitalghost at 3:34 pm (utc) on Oct. 27, 2008]
| 3:34 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
But you'll just get exacerbated. ;)
| 3:47 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
War on terror.
How can you fight terror? War on terrorists, possibly. But given its widespread usage, I guess I'll have to 'except' it.
| 3:50 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
The use of 'personally' is curious even when it is not coupled with 'myself'. Is there ever a need to use 'personally' when making a statement?
'Literally', when it is misused for 'figuratively', makes me cringe. Phrases like, "He was literally exploding he was so mad" fly right by without question.
Yet another redundancy that annoys me is, "revert back", as in, "The Soviet Union reverted back to communism".
| 3:57 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Is there ever a need to use 'personally' when making a statement? |
If a person is a spokesperson (official or unofficial), the use of "personally" can help separate the "official" position from the spokesperson's personal opinion.
But I agree- it's rarely used in that way.
| 4:10 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Personally, I use it on boards such as this to emphasise my own habit, rather than a well established norm.
While technically redundant, it helps differentiate between a pure opinion, and a belief (for lack of a better word for somewhere between opinion and knowledge)
| 4:19 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
'Literally' in front of any metaphor as an emphasis of the semantic content is definately grating, but stunningly widespread.
"semantic meaning": acceptable or misuse?
| 6:23 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
For all intense and purposes ... now that's intents!
| 6:25 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I've seen for all intensive purposes too.
| 6:37 pm on Oct 27, 2008 (gmt 0)|
>>intense and purposes
I've also seen that as 'intensive purposes'. May we talk about 'alterior' motives? ;) Or 'blessing in the sky'? (blessing in disguise) What about 'off the beat and path'? Or pawn off rather than palm off? Or 'splitting image'?
To be fair though, the English language can be infuriating. Just think about mettle, medal, metal and meddle for a minute...
| 7:52 am on Oct 28, 2008 (gmt 0)|
new and improved
|To be fair though, the English language can be infuriating. Just think about mettle, medal, metal and meddle for a minute... |
and then there's the non-homonym pronunciations:
|the tough coughs as he ploughs the dough |
| 11:29 am on Oct 28, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I guess the worse I ever saw was "intense and porpoises" which only goes to show you're only as good as your spell checker.
| 3:43 pm on Oct 28, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Everyone has limitations. Annoyance at another's limitations originates from the ego, and is a good sign for me to take a check at the cause of my annoyance. There are a lot of people who have a poor grasp of language and grammar but outdistance me in thinking outside the box.
I'm jus anoyed wen tey do it out of lazyness or on perpuss.
| 3:54 pm on Oct 28, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I'm not so worried about mistakes- I doubt I've posted on these boards without a typo, or with a word missed out or left behind from a re-type (this thread excepted- I'm being careful).
It's in print media, or on ads, or anywhere thats supposed to be professionally produced.
Or REALLY stupid things like "literally" before a metaphor
| 4:43 pm on Oct 28, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Annoyance at another's limitations originates from the ego |
Since I is a college grajuate, I like to look down my knows at those who are less ejuhkated.
<edited to fix speeling>
[edited by: lawman at 6:23 am (utc) on Oct. 29, 2008]
| 3:00 am on Oct 29, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I new I shouldn't of looked at this thread. Theirs to many of my pet peeves listed hear. We should all pay more attention to are own mistakes.
| 9:18 am on Nov 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
formerly versus formally
| 5:03 pm on Nov 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I love when people say
'in actual fact'
the way that a large number of people seem to combine leery and wary and think that using weary makes them anything but tired
| This 37 message thread spans 2 pages: 37 (  2 ) > > |