Working to fix ignorance, one cohort at a time. This is the noble labour.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Words or phrases that annoy you (even if you can't explain why) . . .
- Thread starter usagora
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Working to fix ignorance, one cohort at a time. This is the noble labour.
It is.
And I am also reminded of Lady Bracknell's wonderful quote.
However, in truth, when the face of a student lights up with dawning comprehension and a sudden flash of understanding - and when they want to tell you this, sometimes agog with excitement becasue they want to share this moment of (their) discovery with you - that, that is one of the real psychological pay-offs of teaching, the sort of thing that falls under the heading of genuine "job satisfaction".
That flicking of the "on" switch in a student's mind; when you find the "on" switch, and flick it, the rewards - for you (a strange but satisfying little internal glow, the kind of thing that no metric devised by a business school can ever begin to measure) and for the student (interest in their studies, fascination, engagement, motivation, joy in learning, pleasure in attending class and completing assignments) are incalculable.
Never heard that one before, but it is indeed annoying.
Here's one that I can't stand: "deets," as a substitute for "details"
"my bad"
This takes the cake. In written form and more so in spoken form, especially used by someone over 20...
Some readers and listeners tune out after that phrase occurs.
This takes the cake. In written form and more so in spoken form, especially used by someone over 20...
Some readers and listeners tune out after that phrase occurs.
Makes me want to choose violence. Especially the last time someone said that (well wrote that) to me basically ignoring my argument no ... misrepresenting it.
"Fisticuffs" is simply an old fashioned (and almost archaic) British English expression for a fistfight.
It was widely used in the 17th and 18th centuries, and might still be used in an ironical - and to convey a disbelieving or detached or ironically amused sense at how incongruous, unexpected and ridiculous this event is - a sense of the almost ridiculous when describing a disagreement, or fight, or brawl, somewhere (on the grounds of social class) - where one wouldn't expect to see a physical fight break out (such as a parliament, or TV studio, or a serious public speech by a well respected individual in politics, the law, the arts, etc).
Last edited:
This brings to mind "knuckle sandwich". Used quite a bit in movies in the 1920's to 1950's.
“Fist city!”
It’s a North American colloquialism and saves a syllable from “my mistake” or “my error”. This one doesn’t bother me.
What bothers me is every time someone drops a “not gonna lie” before or after a connected statement. Am I led to believe everything else they’ve been saying or writing is chock full of fibs and fabrications? 🤔 Because if so, then… I have many questions about their basic character.
I’m one of those people who has and will continue to use, “You do you.”
OK. Why?
From time to time, people you run across are going to disagree with you. That isn’t when I say it.
I say it during high-tension times when someone strives to stiff-arm their disagreement using more forceful tactics, such as goading, egging, trolling, and/or stochastic threats. Sometimes, they might try to stiff-arm for the sake of “winning” a contention they’re making — one on which I’m not aboard. When I reply “you do you” to them, I am walking away and I’m letting them continue to play their game, but only with themselves — depriving them of an involuntary sparring opponent — because they are not worth engaging me any further and not worth the energy to be engaged by them any further.
It means, “You’ll still do what you were going to do, irrespective of what comes from your futile conduct, and it’s not worth my time, desire, or energy to waste with you any further. Go ahead and do your thing as you would anyway, but do avoid obstructing my ability to do what I need to on my own as it works best for my needs, thanks.”
That’s a lot of tl;dr. So “You do you,” followed by walking away, gets more to the point, and promptly. It’s three syllables (seven letters) and a complete imperative. Any more than three and I wouldn’t have the energy for them. It’s what I use to shut down the back and forth. If that makes them angrier, then that’s something they need to deal with in some another, more constructive way which doesn’t involve me. It’s their problem, not mine. I’m moving on without them.
Upper class ruffians.Normally only ruffians engage in fisticuffs.
Fisticuffs tends not to be usually used (not nowadays, at least, for the 18th century was different) to describe a brawl in a slum.
This is just a shorter yet unneeded form of, well, “of.” Very common actually as in “cup o’ joe” among others, even in branding as in “Chock Full O’ Nuts.” Regardless, the pronunciation is usually not either of “oh” nor “uv” but more lazily “uh” for either spelling, as in “pound uh flesh,” “cup uh flour,” etc. Sometimes this is even written lazily as “pounda flesh,” “cuppa flour,” etc.
Yes, my post clearly indicates that I understand what it's short for, and I'm well aware it's been in use for a long time, especially in store/product names and marketing. However, in spoken language, many people pronounce "of" as "uh" anyway (or at least spoken quickly it sounds like that), so that wouldn't be annoying to me. I'm talking about when people literally pronounce it "oh"--clearly corresponding to the written " o' " form. I've heard it three times just in the last couple days--the example I gave and also in a TV show where someone said twice in an episode that high school would be a "piece oh cake."
I get annoyed when someone seriously quotes a fictional character as if it was a real person. It is more tolerable if they are being satirical, especially if they quote a cartoon character.
Normally only ruffians engage in fisticuffs.
Gotta be watching out for them real donnybrooks…
I understand you’re joking. They could Quote the movie or the book as the source. It just the blending of reality where people act as fictional characters are real people.
Last edited:
Why would this be surprising? When you are living under the statue of Hecate a highly questionable and dubious esoteric concepts very quickly become the norm.
I am wondering why would you find it annoying? Every trade or profession has its tricks that most people are not aware of and actually is the reason to be humble and not to look down on any trade or profession.
Your example is obviously based on an assumption that you don't need any skills to open a can however I am sure some people are still injure themselves while doing so. I guess there is a reason why they say every day is a school day.
What if I told you I don’t wish to be a Debby Downer here?
The gist of this 53-page thread, having slowly worked my way through all the bits I missed (namely, the first 40 or so pages) is this:
While all who’ve posted have shared a few things which annoy them, some more than others (I’m guilty as charged), none surpasses the quantity of linguistic quirks which vex you specifically, consuming a lot of the air in the room. Dang.
Shifting gears to a magnificent example of recent art, roasting clumsy appropriation of annoying vernacular, is a film I re-watched over the weekend — The Matrix: Resurrections — contained by the character of Jude Gallagher, Neo’s co-worker (who joins him for coffee in the first act).
While there were plenty of critical gripes about the film (in its defence: the film was never meant to exist, and one Lana Wachowski didn’t want to have to make), Lana used the story to critique, bluntly, several linguistic and memetic annoyances, as well as a misappropriation of tropes and ideas from the first film in the quartet. Her critique, laced throughout, sort of mirror-images what this thread comes back to.
In Lana’s case, she distilled some of that into a couple of characters, but much of that went into one, particularly odious character: Jude.
Jude’s cringe-worthy leaning on overboard slang was a big part of why he was such an annoyance (and why, if you’re in on the roast, is so delightfully dry and, at times, acerbic). Examples include his use of “shook” (what he meant was “blown away” or “amazed”, relying instead on AAVE long appropriated, as so much AAVE is); “bee-tee-dubs” (pretty self-explanatory, but up there with “deets” and “dollabills”); “total f’ing MILF” (you know, straight guys being crass when they think they’re in safe company of kindred men); and scowling viscerally at a handsome married man named Chad (because his name was, literally, Chad — the name used to signify everything a, quote-unquote, “involuntarily celebate” guy, like Jude, envies — played by an actor named, literally, Chad… definitely Lana’s wink-nod of tumbling down the rabbit hole).
And since I reached for the third rail by bringing up The Matrix, what if I told you no one at any point in The Matrix Quartet ever opened a question with, “What if I told you…”?