<p>"Besides, a random Google search shows popular usage, not proper usage."</p>
<p>And thus, cj_svu6 reveals why he could never be a good linguist. </p>
<p>Who defines what is "proper"? </p>
<p>And sorry, I'm taking Language Log (which is staffed by esteemed linguists all over the world, including Liberman from UPenn) over the inanity of a name like "hubpages" any day. </p>
<p>Popular usage <em>is</em> contemporary usage => language. Methinks your attempted arrogant elitist linguistic pedantry in making a distinction between "actual language" and popular language reflects your inner need to feel superior over others by correcting them. </p>
<p>Do you know for example, of the memetic perspective of looking at language evolution? Given your logic, you could argue that people with attached earlobes have the "improper allele."</p>
<p>Not quite as arrogant as amb3r, who can't see the irony of accusing others of pretentiousness when he thought he was sounding so smart when he had to correct someone's acceptable <em>colloquial use</em> (e.g. in a forum!) of "good".</p>
<p>.....and I'm a girl, too. I wasn't being arrogant- I would never have pointed that out to the OP had someone else not made it a point of contention. I also never identified myself as a linguist and I am about 99.9% certain that if you had used "good" the way the OP did in an English essay, a teacher would've taken off points. There is a difference between popular usage and accepted popular usage. Using "good" in that context would just sound uneducated to someone who was making judgements about you in any social context (say an interview, at a dinner, etc.)</p>
<p>^which is exactly why I never would have said anything to the OP. However, the debate started long before I entered and I was just adding my side. As to the OP's original question- don't worry about it. That's just one example of this whole process making us go crazy. You're applying to Yale- they expect that people will be able to interview well.</p>