For example, since his election, I have heard Barack Obama refer more than once to "the enormity" of the problems facing the US economy. As a former head of the Harvard Law Review, he ought to know better -- unless he means something different from what I think he means.
Another thing that puzzles me is why so many people in the last few decades have become confused by the phrase " is one of." What follows that phrase should be a definition of the group that the subject belongs to. Such definitions almost always involve plural verb forms (for example, "the people who keep their opinions to themselves"). Every day, I hear people who have presumably gone through journalism school say things like "John McCain is one of those people who puts country first." Obviously, that should be "people who put country first." Thirty years ago, nobody would have made that error.
Many things grate on my ear simply because of my upbringing. I know that "dove" for "dived" is a regionalism, but my grade school teachers drilled into me that saying "dove" was evidence of ignorance. Saying "wait on" for "wait for" falls into that category too, but my grade school teacher never mentioned "wait on." Until I came to California, I thought the only meaning of "wait on" was "serve," as in a restaurant.
Using "loan" for "lend" also grates on my ear. It falls somewhere between ignorance and regionalism -- where the region in question is Wall Street. It's so common now, we might as well just call it correct and forget about the distinction altogether. But I still hear the difference.
The one I'll never accept -- no matter how common it becomes -- is using "lay" for "lie." When you hear about someone "laying low" or getting the" lay of the land," think of it this way. If you hit a golf ball and it comes to rest in an advantageous position, that's a good ---- (fill in lie or lay).
No comments:
Post a Comment