Any particular word(s), phrase(s), etc. you particularly despise?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mathnomalous
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around frustrations with certain phrases and buzzwords commonly used in professional and casual contexts. The phrase "good job" is criticized for being a euphemism for a high-paying job, while "you need to be flexible" is seen as a demand for personal sacrifice for a superior's benefit. Participants express annoyance with manager-speak such as "work smarter, not harder" and "crunch time," which often imply excessive work expectations. Misused phrases like "should of" instead of "should have" and incorrect pronunciations, such as "tempachure," also draw ire. The conversation highlights a broader disdain for jargon and linguistic errors that detract from clear communication, with many contributors sharing their personal pet peeves regarding language misuse. Overall, the thread reflects a collective frustration with the decline of language precision in both professional and everyday settings.
  • #61
Jimmy Snyder said:
If I have offended anyone, it was not my intention.
Instead of, I apologize.

Oh wow, that's a great one! There are so many versions of non-apologies, it's maddening.

"It's regrettable that you were upset by my words."

What the heck is that :confused:?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
"Don't take this the wrong way, but..."
 
  • #63
Jimmy Snyder said:
The thing of it is, is, I want to tell you all my thoughts on this thread, because it's time to get hot. You know crunch time. So, with a sense of urgency and regardless of any possibly possible need to be flexible in particular, I intend to work smarter, not harder. After all you got to do what you got to do. So I plug in my power tie and sidle over to my wife who is in the kitchen preparing something. She is half way through the marination, an innovention of hers, which I would guestimate to be a good job. I whisper in her ear "I love you." This shows I have good family values, do you not agree? She took it to the next level saying "Let's do lunch". I replied "Thank you for asking, sounds too good to be true." A rather mute point since everything she cooks is good. I'm a team player, so I eat with gusto. You betcha. Oh well, you can't please everyone.

Someone should rain him in.
 
  • #64
lisab said:
Oh wow, that's a great one! There are so many versions of non-apologies, it's maddening.

"It's regrettable that you were upset by my words."

What the heck is that :confused:?

That's trolling, that is. It's the old, "Gosh, It's too bad people got all offended by my comments. I'm just being witty and pointing out some facts and folks take it the wrong way. Well I'm sorry if you are all thin-skinned children who can't see the obvious wisdom of my pithy remarks, I'll be extra careful around here in the future, because, heaven knows I wouldn't want to be banned because someone simply can't follow my superior logic. Toodles."
 
  • #65
What you need is a quart of iodine in your thyroid gland.
 
  • #66
nobahar said:
I remember a comedian made a joke (as they do)
An acute observation that should not be taken lightly. :biggrin:

nobahar said:
when poeple 'do' quotation marks with their fingers - to emphasise a point.

This brings to mind another one that never ceases to piss me off. People have a tendency to say "Quote, unquote, blah blah blah." Are they really too stupid to realize that it should be "Quote, blah blah blah, unquote"?
 
  • #67
Virtually every emcee/function host I've heard says, "Without further ado.."

Really? I didn't know we were ado-ing in the first place. Do they not know that ado means "Bustle; fuss; trouble; bother". So, then are they saying that everything that preceded whatever or whoever they're introducing was all bustle and bother? Then why were they doing it in the first place? Why bother everyone in the room to begin with? Did they really think that they were being a bother?

Gack that one gets on my nerves.
 
  • #68
lisab said:
Oh wow, that's a great one! There are so many versions of non-apologies, it's maddening.

My wife learned me this bit of wisdom:

An "I am sorry" that is followed by a "but" is not an apology, it is an attempt to rationize one's action.

If you're really sorry, there is no qualifier.
 
  • #69
People that say "learned me" instead of "taught me".
 
  • #70
leroyjenkens said:
Recently, it has been really annoying when I see someone type "should of" instead of "should have".

my peeve is when people say "eye eee" for id est when they should 'ave just said "that is". they're not saving a dime on either printer's ink or syllables, but i guess it is supposed to make you sound smart.
 
  • #71
GeorginaS said:
Virtually every emcee/function host I've heard says, "Without further ado.."

Really? I didn't know we were ado-ing in the first place. Do they not know that ado means "Bustle; fuss; trouble; bother". So, then are they saying that everything that preceded whatever or whoever they're introducing was all bustle and bother? Then why were they doing it in the first place? Why bother everyone in the room to begin with? Did they really think that they were being a bother?

To me, this looks like much ado about ado. Maybe we could call this "meta-ado." :-p
 
  • #72
GeorginaS said:
Virtually every emcee/function host I've heard says, "Without further ado.."

And in furtherance of your observation, they inevitably proceed to ado far more. Along the same line is the situation of an emcee who says "A man who needs no introduction" and then spends 5 minutes introducing him.
 
  • #73
DaveC426913 said:
An "I am sorry" that is followed by a "but" is not an apology, it is an attempt to rationize one's action.
I'm sorry, but no one of you probably speaks my language. You will not understand why what I have in mind is... quite irritating.
 
  • #74
Upisoft said:
I'm sorry, but no one of you probably speaks my language. You will not understand why what I have in mind is... quite irritating.

The point really is not whether or not we speak it, but rather whether or not we understand it. Going by the quoted statement, I agree that I don't.
 
  • #75
Manager speak: "blah blah blah...and we'll touch base later".

When someone says "See you later" and they know they won't.
 
  • #76
I Hate It When...

...people say "goodbye" when they actually have no desire to have "God be With you."
Have we hit rock-bottom yet?
 
  • #77
Chi Meson said:
Have we hit rock-bottom yet?
Yes, I think so too.
 
  • #78
Evo said:
People that say "learned me" instead of "taught me".
I save that one for special situations. But really, try this next time you get in a car accident as a passenger, when the accident was caused by the jackass driving you (works best immediately after the accident):

"Yup. That'll lern 'em."

That phrase has a beautiful impact.
 
  • #79
"if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything"

translation: fall for what I'm selling you
 
  • #80
"if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem"

translation:
stop criticizing me!
 
  • #81
"present company excluded"

translation:
and you're an idiot too!
 
  • #82
Pythagorean said:
"present company excluded"

translation:
and you're an idiot too!

It actually means quite the opposite...
 
  • #83
Jack21222 said:
It actually means quite the opposite...

Suuuure it does.

See 'no offense intended', above...
 
  • #84
Upisoft said:
I'm sorry, but no one of you probably speaks my language. You will not understand why what I have in mind is... quite irritating.
Why would one apologize for something that is not in their control?

You Canadian?
 
  • #85
collinsmark said:
I save that one for special situations. But really, try this next time you get in a car accident as a passenger, when the accident was caused by the jackass driving you (works best immediately after the accident):

"Yup. That'll lern 'em."

That phrase has a beautiful impact.
Yyyyep. I chose it carefully too. :biggrin:
 
  • #86
DaveC426913 said:
Why would one apologize for something that is not in their control?

You Canadian?

That or British?

I've never known people to apologise to the person who walks into them quite as much as the British.
 
  • #87
jarednjames said:
That or British?

I've never known people to apologise to the person who walks into them quite as much as the British.
Hmmm... I do believe that we Canuks have it over the Brits in that regard. (Per Capita, that is; they have about 10 times our population in a land mass area equal to one of our intermediate provinces, so interactions will be proportionally more numerous.)
 
  • #88
jarednjames said:
I've never known people to apologise to the person who walks into them quite as much as the British.

We're generally polite folk :smile:.
 
  • #89
Danger said:
Hmmm... I do believe that we Canuks have it over the Brits in that regard. (Per Capita, that is; they have about 10 times our population in a land mass area equal to one of our intermediate provinces, so interactions will be proportionally more numerous.)

So should that be 'per square capita', if the number of interactions roughly quadruples when the population doubles? Or 'per (capita per km2)' if it's more area-related?

:-p
 
  • #90
So what would happen if 2 Canucks and 2 Brits arrive at a 4-way-stop intersection, all at the same time?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
62
Views
10K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 79 ·
3
Replies
79
Views
11K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
10K