It's not "intensive purposes", it's "intents and purposes." It's not "could care less", it's "couldn't care less."
No, I think this could use its own topic altogether. I feel like people could use this as a little learning resource. I mean, I know they won't, but a guy can dream right?
These are called malapropisms. It's said that Shakespeare was one of the first to use them for comedic effect. The thing about the last one is that they both can be used. That one couldn't care less is the extreme of the two, that one could care less means that they care, but they could certainly stand to care less here's one: pigment of my imagination vs. figment of my imagination
I am afraid it is a losing battle James. BBC News magazine - Are language cops losing war against 'wrongly' used words?The AP Stylebook and dictionaries in general are becoming more 'accepting' of such things. I completely agree there is a constant evolution of language, and I fully support that, but I would [strongly] make the argument that what is taking place now is on a whole different level from that. In this world of digital freedom/lack of editorial control, texting, one-line emails, twitter, and so forth, there is a genuine loss of language, grammar, spelling - and worst, understanding. The lack of awareness demonstrated by simple examples like you've posted just shows a complete lack of thought put into what is being said. What is really frightening is seeing these poor forms of grammar being used by individuals in 'newsmedia.'
I overheard a coworker tell her daughter to "decease and desist". I didn't correct her, instead I laughed to myself while looking for a new job. Thankfully my employer built a new facility in another country and moved all our jobs there. Unlike the sitcom I was not sent with it.
"intensive purposes" is always sort of embarrassing. You can see why the blunder is made ... the writer is going on what they think they've heard, although in context the error doesn't really make sense. How did "boatload" become "buttload?" I figure that's another one where the writer misunderstood the original word, but I'm not 100% sure. Maybe they intend to be gross. Similarly, when did "buck naked" transform into "butt naked?" ultrakaiju, thanks for the link. Couldn't agree more about the sorry state of journalistic writing at many sites these days. Those entrusted to set a good example have become so sloppy, fake-clever and conversational in their writing ... it only advances general illiteracy.
let's get a few out of the way... it's euthanasia, not youth in asia it's dog eat dog, not doggy dog it's allusion, not delusion
one time I heard someone singing Gun's n Roses Paradise City. "Take me down to the very nice city where the grass is green and the girls are pretty" I just pointed and laughed.
The first time I heard MJ's "Billie Jean" I could have sworn he was singing "...but the chair is not my size..."
when i was a little kid in the 80's i used to sing that paul young cover as.... "every time you go away, you take a piece of meat with you" lol
It's not "I will be with you in a moment.", it's "I will be with you momentarily." It's not "irregardless", it's "regardless". It's not "per say", it's "per se".
"how are you doing?" "i'm doing good." "no, you're doing well. superman does good." also... it's not "there's a bathroom on the right," it's "there's a bad moon on the rise."
It's not "brah", it's "bro"... No wait, it's "brother"... Wait, what do you mean, he's not really your brother???
