<p>S is tired of hearing me say: Omit needless words. Omit needless words. Omit needless words.</p>
<p>that's sweet</p>
<p>Some other expressions that I learned on CC:</p>
<p>xyz rocks or, to be more emphatic, xyz rocks my world. :)</p>
<p>abc owned xyz or xyz was owned (as in Harvard owned Yale in the Game--we're not talking property rights here) :( When I lived in London, it was "Chelsea rules, OK?" (and you'd better not disagree).</p>
<p>"S is tired of hearing me say: Omit needless words. Omit needless words. Omit needless words."</p>
<p>Wow, that seems tautologically redundant to me. Or at least repetitive.</p>
<p>Someone please explain to me what the hell is a "boo" or "my boo" I have heard numerous idiots say that and have no freaking clue. Also what the heck is a "shawty"?</p>
<p>I am afraid that hopefully is here to stay. It is, however, not the only word that causes problems: </p>
<p>*"Most of those who object to hopefully in its looser sense do so on the argument that it is a misused modal auxiliary --- that is to say, that it falls to modify the elements it should. Take the sentence "Hopefully the sun will come out soon." As constructed, this sentence suggests (at least to a literal-minded person) that it is the sun whose manner is hopeful, not yours or mine. After all, you would hardly say, "Believably the sun will come out soon" if you believed it might, or "Thinkingly the sun will come out soon" if you thought as much.
The shortcoming of this argument is that those writers who scrupulously avoid hopefully in such constructions do not hesitate to use at least a dozen other words --- apparently, presumably, happily, sadly, mercifully, thankfully, and so on --- in precisely the same way. In Paradigms Lost, the American critic John Simon roundly disdained the looser hopefully, yet elsewhere he wrote, "Marshall Sahlins, who professes anthropology at the University of Chicago, errs some fifteen times in an admittedly long piece." That admittedly is every bit as unattached as any hopefully ever was.</p>
<p>A second objection is to the lameness of the word. If a newspaper editorial says, "Hopefully the actors' strike will end today," who exactly is doing the hoping? The writer? The actors? All right-minded people? Too often the word is used as no more than an easy escape from taking direct responsibility for a sentiment and as such is better avoided."
.....Borrowed from Bill Bryson's Dictionary of Troublesome Words. *</p>
<p>I think that we all have our pet peeves. I, for one, cannot understand that the constant butchering of the verb "comprise" has been so relentless that the erroneous use has become acceptable, even among the people who are supposed to preserve the traditions of our language. Take a look at the 2009 acceptance letter of Duke:
"Congratulations ? Duke University is now your university. I would like to invite you to join a most impressive group of students who will comprise our Class of 2009.". How sad!</p>
<p>boo" or "my boo" is a term of endearment meaning your girl/boyfriend, girl or fella</p>
<p>shawty- your girlfriend</p>
<p>joev-
"shawty" is a team of endearment used by men to refer to women...much like darling, sweetheart, etc. Although it is pronounced "shawty", it really is "shorty". People my age can associate this with one of the many previous versions....as I remember being called "slim" and better yet "slimmy slim"(slim and shorty mean the same thing...and you don't have to be slim or short to be called slim or shawty....you just have the be the object of attention at the time). If a girl really is short and attractive to the one doing the name calling, she's more likely to be called "sweet-n-low" (pretty and short).</p>
<p>With regard to "Boo"....I think it came from a song. Though, I can't remember which one. "Boo" is another term of endearment. You could use "Boo" interchangeably with "Babe", as it means the same thing. It sounds really silly to me and I hardly ever hear it.'</p>
<p>EDIT: Didn't see Sybbie's post before I wrote mine. I agree with her....except that I think Boo can be used for "friends" too....and I have heard young girls calling each other "boo"....as in "buddy".</p>
<p>Have you heard Dilemma By Nelly (featuring Kelly Rowland from the Nellyville CD) who affectionately sings about a shawty and she says that even when she's with her boo, she's still thinking about him </p>
<p>or My Boo (Usher & Alicia Keys)</p>
<p>"she's with her boo, she's still thinking about him "</p>
<p>Well, in such a case...a Boo is someone who is about to be PLAYED! (played = suckered)</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>I'm actually very fond of "my bad". It generally follows a discussion in which things are clarified, as in:</p>
<p>"You're the sub, right? You know any physics at all?"
"Yes. What do you need help with?"
"You sure you know this stuff?"
"Yes, I went to MIT."
"My bad."</p>
<p>It generally both apologizes and acknowledges that the error originates in the speaker's words. It may not sound very polite--but it works for me.</p>
<p>As for "meh," which my daughter uses extensively, it carries (in her voice) an intonation of slight disgust. </p>
<p>"The dog just threw up."
"Meh."</p>
<p>Xiggi: Fortunately, you made the argument I had avoided (but agree with).</p>
<p>(Now, subject/object number agreement, that's where I draw the line.)</p>
<p>One question I'd like to pose to the students on this thread is: do teachers even teach basic grammar in school anymore? From my vantage point, it appears that analysis and reading comprehension are stressed very heavily (and should be) but basic grammar lessons are being shucked aside.</p>
<p>Students in my school review basic grammar during Freshman year. The lesson is universally frustrating for students, myself included. The mechanical approach to teaching sentence structure is appalling. The material is above the heads of the students who most need help. A far better method, in my opinion, would be to teach on several levels simultaneously.</p>
<p>Traditionally, a teacher supplies following sentence:
"Both Mary and Jack and Joe goes to his school daily to work which doesn't effectively work."</p>
<p>The teacher marks verbs, subjects, modifiers, and the connections between them. Students recall memorized grammatical rules and parse the sentence word by word, searching for errors. The lesson neither teaches practical writing skills nor fosters an innate sense of grammar.</p>
<p>By the end of sophomore year, most students highlight "goes" and say the "flow*" is wrong. The remaining errors are ignored. This is due in part to microscopic lense through which students ana;yze text. The rest is a result of the narrow scope of the lesson. Diction is skipped. Students are not taught why "work" and "effectively" are poor word choices.</p>
<p>Schools need to teach grammar like morals, not like mathematics. Students should be capabable recognizing and correcting poor writing without diving into the laws of parts of speech. That said, forgive any errors made in this post - I have more to say on this topic, but I must do school work. . . this instant. I realize that my argument might not be clear (or complete) at this point. I will try to revisit this post later.</p>
<p>*"flow" is one's gut opinion of a passage's pacing, detail, and structure. In pratice, "flow" is meaningless - it communicates nothing. The word survives because of the almost spiritual connection the ignorant claim to have with it. Those who don't know better begin and end their literary criticism with "flow". One cannot debate an (intentionally) undefined conclusion.</p>
<p>Other errors coming in with the barbarians over the walls: "reticent" used for "reluctant," "duress" for "pressure," and "onus" for "responsibility"...the latter two courtesy of sportscasters.</p>
<p>And questions of connotation vs. denotation seem to be increasingly obscure to many writers.</p>
<p>And then there are made up words like "irregardless" ...</p>
<p>TwinMom:
Ooh, I <em>hate</em> that one. Not to mention 'strategery'.</p>
<p>And then there are teachers who <em>conference</em> ... a word which has somehow morphed from a noun into a verb.</p>
<p>I always thought Arsenio Hall originated, "Woot woot!!!!" :confused:</p>
<p>
[quote]
"Congratulations ? Duke University is now your university. I would like to invite you to join a most impressive group of students who will comprise our Class of 2009.". How sad!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How did that question mark sneak in after "Congratulations" ??? Hopefully there was no question mark in the actual acceptance letters!! LOL So I guess Duke got OWNED!!!!</p>
<p>You must mean "Duke got PWN3D!!!!1211".</p>
<p>The "?" is probably an unrecognized character. I doubt it was in the original document.</p>