are there any words you just dont like?

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

"i dont like obama"
"thats ignorant, man."

........ that's horrible.

 

[420MuNkEy]

Well, right. I don't see the distinction. What's an example of something you'd call incorrect usage of "ignorant"?

People that use it purely as an insult. Like if someone were to say "I didn't like George Bush" and be responded to by a person who says something like "That's because you're ignorant". There is not anything being mentioned to be ignorant of. I realize this isn't the best example, I'm not sure why, but I can't seem to think of a good one at the moment.

 

[typondis]

In some of these cases, I'm wondering how old you folks are......

That is, while I agree there is a looseness in popcul language usage, I generally don't participate in environments where this happens. I suggest starting there.


(According to definitions I've read, INTPs are supposed to be top-downers....but I ain't seein it, yet.)

 

[420MuNkEy]

In some of these cases, I'm wondering how old you folks are......

That is, while I agree there is a looseness in popcul language usage, I generally don't participate in environments where this happens. I suggest starting there.


(According to definitions I've read, INTPs are supposed to be top-downers....but I ain't seein it, yet.)

I'm not sure if you are referencing a few specific posts or the thread in general.

 

[snowqueen]

'gotten'

nouns used as verbs - eg actioning

the new phrase 'going forward' - WTF???

 

[asdfasdfasdfsdf]

In some of these cases, I'm wondering how old you folks are......

That is, while I agree there is a looseness in popcul language usage, I generally don't participate in environments where this happens. I suggest starting there.


(According to definitions I've read, INTPs are supposed to be top-downers....but I ain't seein it, yet.)

when you live on campus in college... you run into allot of environments that you wouldnt necessarily "participate" in

 

[420MuNkEy]

when you live on campus in college... you run into allot of environments that you wouldnt necessarily "participate" in

a lot*

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

conservative/liberal - I don't think anyone knows the meaning of those two words anymore. They've been rendered essentially useless except as cheap insults.

The word ignorant may not be as wrongly used as has been suggested. To call someone ignorant is technically true. We are all ignorant in many ways. The problem is more that someone might assume what another might know about a subject based on the fact that that someone disagrees with the name caller. People tend to believe they are right and thus take any disagreement with their assumptions as being the product of ignorance. Which makes them ignorant of the fact that other perceptions and interpretations of data can be just as valid.

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

conservative/liberal - I don't think anyone knows the meaning of those two words anymore. They've been rendered essentially useless except as cheap insults.

Not where I've grown up, at least. They're not really used as insults but as real descriptors.

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

Not where I've grown up, at least. They're not really used as insults but as real descriptors.

So what do the words mean to you? Do you think the ideologies match the definitions?

 

[ohrtonz]

I hate the word "but" when the statement after is not conflicting or not an opposite of the first statement. And especially when the first statement implies the second. "He is cold, but he is shivering" "The object is a soft blue, but light in color."

I just thought of this now though. Perhaps the "but" is trying to put focus on the second statement. "He is cold. He is cold
"Yes, I know he is cold, but he is shivering!"

"I'm going to the store, but I'm getting groceries" as if to say, "don't expect me to buy you toys" by emphasizing groceries. "I'm going to the store, but I'm only getting groceries" there. that works.

 

[typondis]

I'm not sure if you are referencing a few specific posts or the thread in general.

Which part(s) are you refering to?

when you live on campus in college... you run into allot of environments that you wouldnt necessarily "participate" in

(Interesting - it didn't show both our quotes when I pressed the quote button....)

Ummm......hmmmmm......if I hadn't gone into the Corps after high school, I likely wouldn't ever have gone to college. Of course, after getting out, it was impossible I'd live on campus, cos a) I've always had a car; b) I didn't didn't live in a big city; c) I'm too fuckin squared away to tolerate a lack of attention to one's environment; d) I was at school only so long as I had to be, and then I went home; and e) when I was hangin round, I was mostly with my instructors. Almost boned one of 'em. She's still a friend.

 

[vexsuprise]

alright has you heard of the word, word word word, haha no what are your opinions on the word snafu, i think meaning, shnazee or neat and new. actually not really sure what it means and not sure if i like it. Have you heard the word.
Bird Bird Bird the bird is the word.........really, snafu have you heard? tell me what it means.

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

Snafu = Situation Normal, All Fucked Up.

A term GIs used during the WW2. It's taken on a somewhat different meaning in the years since. Usually relating to hitting a snag or a glitch.

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

So what do the words mean to you? Do you think the ideologies match the definitions?

Mmm. I won't object to anyone's use of the word so long as it fits generally accepted rules of usage. What do you mean, ideologies match the definitions?

Conservative:

Characterized by a tendency to preserve or keep intact or unchanged; preservative; characterized by the principle of the maintenance of existing institutions political and ecclesiastical; characterized by caution or moderation.

Liberal:

Free from bigotry or unreasonable prejudice in favour of traditional opinions or established institutions; open to the reception of new ideas or proposals of reform.

Favourable to constitutional changes and legal or administrative reforms tending in the direction of freedom or democracy.

 

[asdfasdfasdfsdf]

I hate the word "but" when the statement after is not conflicting or not an opposite of the first statement.

now that you point it to my attention, that really bothers me as well.

 

[asdfasdfasdfsdf]

Mmm. I won't object to anyone's use of the word so long as it fits generally accepted rules of usage. What do you mean, ideologies match the definitions?

Conservative:

Liberal:

just saying, those definitions seem VERY biased towards liberalism...

 

[Decaf]

Snafu = Situation Normal, All Fucked Up.

A term GIs used during the WW2. It's taken on a somewhat different meaning in the years since. Usually relating to hitting a snag or a glitch.

True, but if SNAFU hadn't been stolen no one would have come up with FUBAR (Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition), which I prefer.

 

[Aoi Sora]

some phrases-

-"that is word, man"
-"yo, bro, hook it up, man!"
-"sketch, dude, totally sketch"
-" and, yeah..." <---personally hate this.

oh, and "bless their/his/her hearts" after insulting a person.

 

[Tyria]

The word like (especially when used in valspeak). It's overused and trite.

 

[Wish]

I really don't like the words 'knight' and 'crimson' - though not necessarily in that order

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

just saying, those definitions seem VERY biased towards liberalism...

You're likely right, although if you are a liberal you may not understand immediately that I would consider myself complimented if someone applied the definition of "conservative" from up there to me.

 

[Cavallier]

If you take off the first sentence of that definition of liberalism then I don't see any real bias one way or the other.

Those really are the classical definitions:

Conservative=Doesn't like change. Preservative is actually a wonderful word to use in this case.

Liberalism=Likes change. Favorable to change is, again, a wonderful way to describe this term.

I don't really see any point to that first sentence accept that perhaps one of the guiding tenants of liberalism is to eschew bigotry...but then again I've known as many intolerant liberals as conservatives. I think people are intolerant no matter their political leanings. I agree with Inappropriate on this one. These terms have mostly become insults where I live.

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

It can be a little more complicated that that, though. Often, both liberals and conservatives call for reform (i.e. change) - the liberals, for change away from tradition; the conservatives, for change back towards tradition.

Yet, the long-term essence is as you say.

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

just saying, those definitions seem VERY biased towards liberalism...

just saying, conservatives think everything is VERY biased towards liberalism. Just look at those idiots at conservapedia who think the Bible has a liberal bias (and thus must "reinterpret' it!)

Mmm. I won't object to anyone's use of the word so long as it fits generally accepted rules of usage. What do you mean, ideologies match the definitions?

My problem with the words is that the usage of the word (when used to refer to political ideologies) does not have generally accepted rules of usage. I wouldn't mind your definitions being used as generally accepted.

 

[asdfasdfasdfsdf]

just saying, conservatives think everything is VERY biased towards liberalism. Just look at those idiots at conservapedia who think the Bible has a liberal bias (and thus must "reinterpret' it!)

just because every conservative thinks so, if i were to even buy that, doesnt mean that i was wrong in that particular statement.
i dont have too much of a problem with the conservative definition, but in the liberal one: "Free from bigotry or unreasonable prejudice in favour of traditional opinions or established institutions;" this, not only is a false statement, but seems like whoever wrote this definition was trying to spit in the face of conservatives.. kinda like saying "you all are a bunch of ureasonably prejudiced bigots"
... which is full of shit.

and as nicholas said.. true conservatism isnt about not changing anything.. its about changing back to the roots.. to the constitution.

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

just because every conservative thinks so, if i were to even buy that, doesnt mean that i was wrong in that particular statement.
i dont have too much of a problem with the conservative definition, but in the liberal one: "Free from bigotry or unreasonable prejudice in favour of traditional opinions or established institutions;" this, not only is a false statement, but seems like whoever wrote this definition was trying to spit in the face of conservatives.. kinda like saying "you all are a bunch of ureasonably prejudiced bigots"
... which is full of shit.

Okay, that is fair. I was mainly teasing anyway about how some conservatives are always seeing bias which strikes me as funny. Ss Cavalier pointed out though, there is bigotry on both sides. There is a lot to point to on the conservative side (politically anyway) pertaining to bigotry so while saying liberalism is "free" of bigotry is certainly false, there is some basis for the "spit in the face".

and as nicholas said.. true conservatism isnt about not changing anything.. its about changing back to the roots.. to the constitution.

*sigh*

I so want to let this go and say "God, not another 'back to the constitution' crap." Part of me really wants to know where and exactly how we diverged from the constitution (specifically!) and when exactly we actually lived by it as is often called for these days. But I don't want to derail this thread and turn it into a constitution debate. So I'll let this statement go

 

[typondis]

Again, I'm not seeing any top-down action, here. It's not the words that are annoying, but the usage. I love using words like, 'like', 'killer', 'sketch', etc, and related phrases involving them. But I'm fucking artful about it. There in lies the crux of things.

Otherwise, you're just bitching about culture. There's nothing 'standardized' about it. It helps to have firm, functional definitions of things, and proceed from them. Which more than implies any discussion of the terms of politics is as ridiculous as discussing politics, let alone politics itself. Next.

 

[Oblivious]

YouTube- Monty Python - Woody and Tinny Words

 

[B4nd1t_one]

i hate when people try to sound smart by saying "as well" instead of "too" or "also". ive heard one person use "as well" instead of the word "and" before. needless to say i erupted on the person and felt like a douchebag afterwards.

 

[Schneizel]

"Irony". Look it up.

 

[bananaphallus]

'foreseeable future'. It's an oxymoron for christ's sake, god dammit.

 

[typondis]

'foreseeable future'. It's an oxymoron for christ's sake, god dammit.

No it ain't. The definition of future doesn't preclude speculation.

 

[bananaphallus]

foresee: To know or see in advance
speculate: To engage in a course of reasoning often based on inconclusive evidence.

Of course it doesn't preclude speculation, but that's not what to 'foresee' means. Nothing, at this very moment, is for certain. This term would imply that one can presume something in the future will happen, not may or probably will happen, this can't be done...well it can, but this would be/is presupposing quite a bit.

 

[Agent Intellect]

I detest the words "because" "I" "said" "so" when used in that order.

 

[typondis]

foresee: To know or see in advance
speculate: To engage in a course of reasoning often based on inconclusive evidence.

Of course it doesn't preclude speculation, but that's not what to 'foresee' means. Nothing, at this very moment, is for certain. This term would imply that one can presume something in the future will happen, not may or probably will happen, this can't be done...well it can, but this would be/is presupposing quite a bit.

The phrase is a loose usage. So your fretting is much ado about nothing.

However, if you want to get technical, I pre-conceive a lot of things. The night before meeting my....companion....girlfriend, whatever you want to call her....the other day - and before I'd talked on the phone with her or even had much correspondence with her besides 'yeah, lets meet!' - I 'knew' I was going to deeply connect with her, to the point of love making by that night, and that I would meet her daughter, who would instantly welcome me. Well, fuck me, all this did happen.

 

[420MuNkEy]

I hate when people mistake "a lot" for "allot" (or "alot"). I often see this mistake made by people who seem like they should know better. It's like seeing type "rilly" instead of "really" and not noticing

 

[bananaphallus]

The phrase is a loose usage. So your fretting is much ado about nothing.

However, if you want to get technical, I pre-conceive a lot of things. The night before meeting my....companion....girlfriend, whatever you want to call her....the other day - and before I'd talked on the phone with her or even had much correspondence with her besides 'yeah, lets meet!' - I 'knew' I was going to deeply connect with her, to the point of love making by that night, and that I would meet her daughter, who would instantly welcome me. Well, fuck me, all this did happen.

*I realize how petty this all is

Not sure who's fretting here...and I'm also not so sure what's so loose about the usage. You couldn't have known with any real certainty that any of the things you've described would happen, you may have felt very confident that they would, but to 'know' or 'foresee' that these things would take place is, dare I say, poppycock. Nothing about even the immediate future is certain, you can speculate or proffer possibilities til' you've gone all numb and blue, but who's to say it's so far outside the realm of possibility that your companion/girlfriend would be mauled by foxes before meeting you? Or that upon meeting you this companion of yours would decide to end the relationship? You couldn't possibly know anything about the future, no one can.

 

[sagewolf]

I hate when people mistake "a lot" for "allot" (or "alot"). I often see this mistake made by people who seem like they should know better. It's like seeing type "rilly" instead of "really" and not noticing

I would like to expand upon this for one of my own opinions:

ALL words derived from txtspk. Or chtspk. I don't think the co-worker I mentioned earlier (who overuses 'seriously' would annoy me half as much if she didn't pronounce it 'srsly'. I didn't even think the human larynx and mouth were capable of articulating a three-syllable word (unlike 'seriously', 'srsly' only has three syllables, apparently) that contained only one pseudo-vowel,tacked on at the end. But hey, what do I know, I was only at the top of MY English class. There are others, where I would be at the bottom, I'm sure.

 

[Polaris]

The misuse/exploitation of the word "organic". Anything containing carbon atoms is organic. Organic chemistry is the science of hydro-carbon structures, for example.

 

[severus]

FEASIBLE
I hate the word. It sounds, and looks, disgusting.

I too have come to greatly dislike the words "ironic," "literally," and "chagrin" because they are hardly ever used properly. And "aggravate"!

saunter, glib, moist, hanky...
I'm sure there's more that I'm forgetting.

 

[phantome]

overused words.
for example "like" and "legit"

 

[typondis]

You couldn't have known with any real certainty that any of the things you've described would happen, you may have felt very confident that they would, but to 'know' or 'foresee' that these things would take place is, dare I say, poppycock. Nothing about even the immediate future is certain, you can speculate or proffer possibilities til' you've gone all numb and blue, but who's to say it's so far outside the realm of possibility that your companion/girlfriend would be mauled by foxes before meeting you? Or that upon meeting you this companion of yours would decide to end the relationship? You couldn't possibly know anything about the future, no one can.

I see you've never exprienced 'psychic' phenomena.

I hate when people mistake "a lot" for "allot" (or "alot"). I often see this mistake made by people who seem like they should know better. It's like seeing type "rilly" instead of "really" and not noticing

Actually, there is only 'a lot'. Orthogonally, there is only 'all right' - however, I use that as well as 'alright'. The former is for meaning something is completely correct, as well as emphasizing the word 'right'; the latter is for meaning 'okay', as well as vocalising without syllabic emphasis. And on that note, 'OK' means 'correct' or that you're acknowledging someone with emphasis; whereas 'okay' is a soft form of these. Incidentally, I never use the former. (I use other tools to facilitate emphasis.)

I would like to expand upon this for one of my own opinions:

ALL words derived from txtspk. Or chtspk. ....

There is an inherent issue with people needing to save time and energy in trivial ways. I always write my shit out, even when I text.

The misuse/exploitation of the word "organic". Anything containing carbon atoms is organic. Organic chemistry is the science of hydro-carbon structures, for example.

How about the word 'natural'? Nothing in the universe is 'un-natural'. But in smaller contexts.....

FEASIBLE
I hate the word. It sounds, and looks, disgusting.

Sounds like a personal problem.....

 

[420MuNkEy]

Actually, there is only 'a lot'. Orthogonally, there is only 'all right' - however, I use that as well as 'alright'. The former is for meaning something is completely correct, as well as emphasizing the word 'right'; the latter is for meaning 'okay', as well as vocalising without syllabic emphasis. And on that note, 'OK' means 'correct' or that you're acknowledging someone with emphasis; whereas 'okay' is a soft form of these. Incidentally, I never use the former. (I use other tools to facilitate emphasis.)

Actually, "allot" is a real word (meaning to apportion or distribute). "Alot" however, is just a typo that's visually torturous.

 

[The Frood]

I am guilty of "alot" i think it stems from the same problem as my terrible handwriting; I can't get my thoughts down fast enough. but i don't have a problem with txt/chat-speak as long as it stays on the screen.

Also guilty of saying seriously a lot (lol) but I pronounce it thoroughly and generally either in a sarcastic tone, or trying to reassure the person i'm talking to that I'm well... being serious.

However, something that drives me insane, and, and.
when someone is listing off things and does this; the smileys on this forum are silly, and animated and green. You only use 1 and at the end of the list!

Also it bugs me when people use words wrong,

or say inside jokes when they aren't "inside",

when people say medieval ages rather than middle ages

and "chainmail", it is actually just "Maille" because maille literally means "armor made of chain", and chainmail is therefore kind of redundant.

 

[typondis]

Actually, "allot" is a real word (meaning to apportion or distribute).QUOTE]


It is completely out of the context. So those using it not only don't know how to spell, but likely are lacking 'allot' in, at least, their functioning vocabulary.

I am guilty of "alot" i think it stems from the same problem as my terrible handwriting; I can't get my thoughts down fast enough. but i don't have a problem with txt/chat-speak as long as it stays on the screen.

I'm betting a different dietary regimen would tremendously aid you.....

...and "chainmail", it is actually just "Maille" because maille literally means "armor made of chain", and chainmail is therefore kind of redundant.

Mm. Yeah, I'll take note of that. I bet most people wouldn't know what the hell I'd be talking about, though.