Ask Lemmy

The letter w. Absolutely unjustified existence vhen v can be used instead. Also referring to people as pupil. Nothing else in English sounds as bad. Like, there isn't even anything fundamentally vrong with it. It's just bad.

ITT: people who understood the question and people who hate certain pronounciations for no reason.

In English, I hate both "from where" and the rarer "from whence". I first found out about the words "whence", "whither", "thence" and "thither" (respectively meaning "from where, "towards where", "from there" and "towards there") while reading the Lord of the Rings in English. I found these were powerful words that could make many sentences shorter and clearer and that it was a shame they went out of popular use...

But then, I also heard "from whence", which struck me as far worse because it was redundant and stripped the word of its power. I first thought it was a mistake, but after seing it several times I looked up how it was meant to be used to see if I wasn't in the wrong and saw that while it had started as a mistake, it came into use several hundred years ago and was used by many famous classic authors, making it acceptable.

Imo, that's probably what killed these words. I guess it had the merit of being less easily misheard, but when "from whence" and "from where" mean the exact same thing, why bother remembering "whence"?

In my native language, French, I kinda dislike "C'est quoi ?" (Litt. "It's what ?", pronounced [sekwa] meaning "What is it ?). It's a vernacular expression often found incorrect... But I also kinda understand why it exists. The most correct way to ask "what is it" is "Qu'est-ce ?" ([kɛsə] or [kɛs]). It works well when written, but I guess being too short, it can be easily misheard. For example, "caisse" (a large box) is pronounced the exact same way. The other alternative, more common in oral speech is "Qu'est-ce que c'est ?" (litt. "What is it that it is ?"). It might seem too long, but it's pronounced [kɛskəse], which has the same number of syllables as "What is it". It is redundant tho, so I understand why "C'est quoi ?", which doesn't sound like anything else, rolls off the tongue and has two syllables is winning over, and will probably be the correct way in the future, but it still kinda sounds wrong to me.

The over usage of "that" on news broadcasts.

"It's that time of ___!" (Insert day, week, year, fall, spring, summer, etc)

There are many countless examples. It's like nails on a chalkboard every time I hear it

#Reason being is

wtf is that

Lay lie, ffs why differentiate Who whom, it serves no great purpose Words like recie||eive, do I need to explain? Must not should be must’n

Commonwealth vocabulary versus non-Commonwealth vocabulary. Despite being commonwealth in terms of my native culture, some of it sounds like we're trying too hard to be contrarian. Take chips and fries for example. The British call potato chips "crisps" and french fries "chips" and they'll have that discussion with you all night long, but they were patented as chips and fries respectively. Or how about "mom" versus "mum"? Despite interchanging them, I prefer "mom", especially in a world where "ma" and "mama" are common, which makes "mum" just sound like you're auditioning as Wednesday Addams. If you look in historical documents from the past, it's certainly never "mum". It all doesn't bother me so much as what bothers me is when those people (you know, the ones who call it the telly instead of a TV) say other people are the derivatives or must bend to them. If I visit London, I'm ordering french fries from McDonald's, not McChips.

It speaks to an ever-evolving world, culture and society. But nothing and nobody really speaks to me.

"This is key" (in business speak)

"Didn't used to".