The first one: "at this point in time," a phrase that became popular during the Watergate hearings. What other point in time would one be in? Two seconds in the future? Two seconds in the past?

"Free gift:" what other type of gift is there?

French-speaking Americans are the worst ambassadors of their chosen second language. They constantly interrupt some poor schlub trying to use a French word with their "helpful" tips for pronunciation.

I have sympathy for people who cannot pronounce words correctly. I know the meaning and usage of many words that I will mangle when using in conversation because I have only seen them in print. Oh, the horror of switching a kid from phonics to sight-reading in mid-stream!

I hate it when signifying motherfuckers don't use words literally. I mean, literally, I explode! And stop fornicating with your mom! I'm getting nauseous (2nd definition) climbing this steep un-learning curve!

I think the one that bugs me most is when sellers on ebay refer to unbroken things as "in tact." It's one word, people. Tact is "a sense of what is appropriate." Being "in tact" makes no kind of sense at all.

Someone online said "walla" for "voila" the other day. Not too long ago a person referring to cannibalism referred to "soil and green."

Many thanks to the Anonymous who pointed out that the yellow ribbon originates in a Civil War Era song. You taught me something I didn't know.

Oh, and P.S., Cary, I love you. No ribbon on my car either.

I need to know how one could use lachrymose appropriately when discussing wine.

I prefer my wine to be phlegmatic, but not bilious.

I do. And the yellow ribbon means we remember they're over there with car bombs and 120 degree heat.

I don't support sending them. I support their getting back in one piece. And impeaching the lying jackass who sent them.

Whichever side of the decision to send them you're on, I think we all agree they should come back safely.

...by someone who only wants to argue about the semantics of words. If we are discussing global warming, and some cad interjects "It's Carbon-Dioxide, not Carbon", the comment has no bearing on the issue we are discussing. Suddenly, everyone veers off into a discussion of the Carbon Cycle and why Carbon is the proper term. In casual conversation, it only matters if there is some possible confusion over the overall topic of conversation. That's my pet peeve... along with the use of "exact same".

*scratching head*

I need to know how one could use lachrymose appropriately when discussing wine.

I prefer my wine to be phlegmatic, but not bilious.

I confess I haven't read the original letter to which this refers (still catching up), but the response fascinated me. Certain types of cheese can be lachrymose, although that's a strange way to refer to a weepy mozzarella. Wine can MAKE people lachrymose. A lachrymose wine, not possible as far as I know.

When people think they're ALWAYS supposed to use "I," like:

"Please send the report to Mary or I."

WRONG!

One uses whichever one would use if the sentence were singular. Since two people are mentioned, you mention yourself last, but you do not automatically use "I" just because 2 people are mentioned.

so:

"send the report to me." "Send the report to Mary or me."

"I need the report." "Mary and I need the report."

arrr, there's my pet peeve of the day.

American Heritage Dictionary says it is indeed "hone in." Not "home in."

Phrasal Verb(s):

hone in

1. To move or advance toward a target or goal: The missiles honed in on the military installation.

2. To direct one's attention; focus: The lawyer honed in on the gist of the plaintiff's testimony.

Gotta love picky people who are WRONG!

"Those Chinese kids have it so hard!"

Chill!!

Enjoying this discussion very much. But deeply embarrassed to have said "the gawker" instead of "gawker." Deeply ashamed. What would happen if someone should accidentally say "the salon"? That would be unbearable.

Meanwhile, I'm still trying to find my carbon footprint.

A scientific reason people speak of being "carbon" neutral rather than CO2 neutral is because CO2 is the result of efficiently burning anything with carbon in it (gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, ethanol, etc.) On the simplest level, tracking carbon useage for energy production is synonymous with tracking CO2 - it's just whether you focus on the reactants or the products. In general it makes more sense to focus on the reactants that way you delineate the fuel from the utilization technology (IC engine, turbine, fuel cell).

If you choose to discuss CO2 only, you cannot do a life-cycle cost very easily. Fuels with carbon produce CO2 on burning, trees and other plants convert CO2 to carbohydrates, oceans absorb CO2 and convert it to carbonic acid (H2CO3). Because carbon is the common element, no pun intended, in all of these compounds, it is simplest to track the fate of carbon atoms rather than CO2 molecules. Basically, instead of listing all of the reactions which produce or consume CO2, you track the common element, carbon.

Dear Bothered -

You are not alone. I almost went insane in the year 1999 trying to make people understand that we were entering a new millineum in 2000. The new millineum started in 2001, but did anyone else care (oh, I know there were a few. There were even little mentions of it on the news.) Nonetheless, the governments of the world chose to inaccurately make a big deal of 2000. Yes, I get it that it was the first time in nearly a century that the first two numbers of a year would not be 19. And I understand how all the Y2K hype made it even more facinated. And then there was the song, Prince's "1999" to make the whole thing sexier. We both know, where there's a song - it's a lost cause.

So - those of us who love truth, accuracy, and argue semantics are few and greatly out-numbered by the mob, the crowd, the public, the people. We always have been - those of us who know it's just a windmill. But, I must admit even I love the romanticism of Quixote. So, we simply have to sit in our smug correctness, with our superior knowledge, while ginormous is added to Webster's. What else can we do. Fight everybody?

Stella ...