Commonly Misused Words

[viscousmemories]

adverse and averse

From dictionary.com:

ad·verse (ad-vûrs, advûrs) adj.

1. Acting or serving to oppose; antagonistic: adverse criticism.
2. Contrary to one's interests or welfare; harmful or unfavorable: adverse circumstances.
3. Moving in an opposite or opposing direction: adverse currents.

a·verse (a-vûrs) adj.

Having a feeling of opposition, distaste, or aversion; strongly disinclined: investors who are averse to taking risks.

Here's an example of a person conflating these terms on another forum:

If sheriffs were not adverse to framing innocent people, We would have to remove it, not only from this sheriff, but from all sheriffs.

In this case it seems that 'averse' would have been a more accurate word choice.

[wade-w]

Probably the most commonly misused words I see are affect and effect. The difference is subtle, but very real.

From dictionary.com:

Usage Note: Affect and effect have no senses in common. As a verb affect is most commonly used in the sense of “to influence” (how smoking affects health). Effect means “to bring about or execute”: layoffs designed to effect savings. Thus the sentence These measures may affect savings could imply that the measures may reduce savings that have already been realized, whereas These measures may effect savings implies that the measures will cause new savings to come about.

[maddog]

"lie" and "lay"

Ugh.
#176

[viscousmemories]

Excellent choices, both of you. There's a third (psychiatric) use of 'affect' too (albeit pronounced differently from affect and effect as commonly used) -- as in "isolation of affect" -- which dictionary.com defines as: "the conscious subjective aspect of an emotion considered apart from bodily changes."

Maddog could you elaborate? I always mix those two up.

[seebs]

comprise.

To comprise is to be composed of. The word-sequence "comprised of" is just plain wrong. It means "being composed of of".

[viscousmemories]

Ah, but the language she is evolving...

Usage Note: The traditional rule states that the whole comprises the parts and the parts compose the whole. In strict usage: The Union comprises 50 states. Fifty states compose (or constitute or make up) the Union. Even though careful writers often maintain this distinction, comprise is increasingly used in place of compose, especially in the passive: The Union is comprised of 50 states. Our surveys show that opposition to this usage is abating. In the 1960s, 53 percent of the Usage Panel found this usage unacceptable; in 1996, only 35 percent objected.

-dictionary.com

[Beth]

When I write essays and reports and edit for my children, I have a very good grasp on correct grammar, in fact, I had, a couple of times, perfect test scores in state exams in grammar(language, language comprehension, reading comprehension, and so on...). In conversation, I often use my own beth-isms or words that that are used in my area in the context of my message in what I am trying to convey. When I am upset or too relaxed is when I normally fall into the yokel grammar in my posts.

[seebs]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

Ah, but the language she is evolving...

I'm all for evolving language when it doesn't entirely reverse the sense of a word.

[Darren]

Originally Posted by seebs

I'm all for evolving language when it doesn't entirely reverse the sense of a word.

But it will evolve whether you like it or not, and sometimes a word meaning one thing will end up meaning the opposite over time: so "blac" in Old English actually meant "white", while its Modern English derivative is "black". Language is in constant motion, like a river, and for all those who lean heavily on dictionaries, remember that spoken language preceeds written language, and each follows a different set of "rules" anyway. Everything we know as "correct" today will be "archaic" tomorrow.

[JoeP]

Originally Posted by maddog

"lie" and "lay"

Ugh.

Lie and lay are misused differently between the US and the UK (and other British-English speaking countries). The common American usage of lay (as in "Lay down here"; intransitive present tense) sounds odd to British ears.

[JoeP]

Mute and moot (a mute point ) have been raised somewhere recently.

This country she is filled with non-native speakers of English so I'm becoming desensitised to misuses.

[Beth]

I have never seen any of these misuses, except for affect and effect and lay and lie. And lay and lie often have different accepted usages down here than it does in propper grammar.

[ceptimus]

Further and farther.

Advise and advice.

While and Whilst.

Principle and principal.

The list is practically endless.

[livius drusus]

Capitol and capital.

[viscousmemories]

Okay you people aren't teaching us anything here! You're supposed to be providing examples and explaining the usage problems. Obviously nobody who misuses the word regularly is gonna look it up him/herself. We must stop the madness here!

Which reminds me:

Your (not mine) and you're (you are)

You're thought a fool if your fly is open in front of the class.

[Ymir's blood]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

While and Whilst.

What is the difference between 'whilst' and 'while?' Every dictionary I check has 'while' listed as the definition for 'whilst.'

Whilst at Onelook Dictionary

[maddog]

Originally Posted by JoeP

Lie and lay are misused differently between the US and the UK (and other British-English speaking countries). The common American usage of lay (as in "Lay down here"; intransitive present tense) sounds odd to British ears.

Sounds odd to these (and plenty of other) American ears, too.

One of the things that bothers me a lot is the inability to understand when the objective case should be used. American kids have been called out so often for saying, "John and me went to the store," (or worse, "Me and John went to the store,") that they think the mistake is using "me" whenever you talk about yourself and another person. So, even when it would be correct to do so, they refrain from using "John and me." Thus, "My parents gave my husband and I a beautiful vacation for our honeymoon." NO, NO, NO!!! When you are the object of a preposition, you use "me." [ETA: in this situation, the preposition is the "understood" word "to": They gave [to] me . . ."] You wouldn't say, "they gave I a gift." You would say, "they gave me a gift." You keep the same case when it's more than one recipient: "they gave John and me a gift." You can tell also, because you would never say, "they gave we a gift." No, you would say, "they gave us a gift." Drives me insane. This one is so bad and so pervasive that it's even crept into "period" movies about England. The writers have got supposedly educated British aristocrats of the 19th c. saying this.
#179

[Beth]

I get told no alot when it should be yes Is that a good example?

[maddog]

Originally Posted by Beth

I get told no alot when it should be yes Is that a good example?

Although, you've just done another one that is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me: "alot." Nope. That expression is two words: "a lot."

But then, I am a certified spelling and grammar Nazi. Oh, rats, now I'm going to get in trouble on the Prince Harry thread for wearing a Gestapo costume!

#180

[Beth]

Originally Posted by maddog

Sounds odd to these (and plenty of other) American ears, too.

One of the things that bothers me a lot is the inability to understand when the objective case should be used. American kids have been called out so often for saying, "John and me went to the store," (or worse, "Me and John went to the store,") that they think the mistake is using "me" whenever you talk about yourself and another person. So, even when it would be correct to do so, they refrain from using "John and me." Thus, "My parents gave my husband and I a beautiful vacation for our honeymoon." NO, NO, NO!!! When you are the object of a preposition, you use "me." [ETA: in this situation, the preposition is the "understood" word "to": They gave [to] me . . ."] You wouldn't say, "they gave I a gift." You would say, "they gave me a gift." You keep the same case when it's more than one recipient: "they gave John and me a gift." You can tell also, because you would never say, "they gave we a gift." No, you would say, "they gave us a gift." Drives me insane. This one is so bad and so pervasive that it's even crept into "period" movies about England. The writers have got supposedly educated British aristocrats of the 19th c. saying this.
#179

Well, there are times that I use the common Me and the kids, or JIm and me, althought I normally use the correct pronoun. There are times that fitting in with people simply comes before perfect grammar.

As far as the incorrect useage of the pronoun I instead of the correct usage of the pronoun me, I was always taught that the more genteel usage of the word was the way you described as the incorrect use. It is incorrect, but in some areas, it is actually seen as the correct usage. -well, as long as one is not in school.

[Beth]

Originally Posted by maddog

Although, you've just done another one that is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me: "alot." Nope. That expression is two words: "a lot."

But then, I am a certified spelling and grammar Nazi. Oh, rats, now I'm going to get in trouble on the Prince Harry thread for wearing a Gestapo costume!

#180

Hehe. Well alot is used rather a lot now. Come on! Relax a little, take a walk on the wild side and use some bad grammar!

[ceptimus]

Originally Posted by Ymir's blood

What is the difference between 'whilst' and 'while?' Every dictionary I check has 'while' listed as the definition for 'whilst.'

Whilst at Onelook Dictionary

You can see straight away that the words aren't equivalent as some substitutions of whilst for while grate horribly:

I visited California for a whilst.

I would say that, in modern usage, you can always get away with substituting while in place of whilst, but not vice-versa. I suppose whilst is becoming obsolete and archaic, but I still prefer to use it in the sense of two or more things happening at the same time:

Whilst I was composing this post I was also drinking a Coke.

[viscousmemories]

Thanks for the "me and I" bit, maddog. And for catching Beth on 'alot'. I was gonna have to do it if you didn't. That one bugs me alot, to.

Yes, you guessed it. Next up is:

to (I go to the store) and too (also: I like frogs too)

Now ahem! About that lie/lay thing...

[viscousmemories]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

I suppose whilst is becoming obsolete and archaic, but I still prefer to use it in the sense of two or more things happening at the same time:

Whilst I was composing this post I was also drinking a Coke.

Well if it's any consolation I never saw Americans using 'whilst' until the advent of the Internet, so it may in fact be spreading globally even if dying out locally.

[ceptimus]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

...grate horribly...

Great and grate.