FEATURE: Misused and Abused Phrases

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

That Doesn't Mean What You Think It Means: Misused and Abused Phrases

Language has a funny way of ingratiating itself on us. Just when you think you have grammar down pat, those sneaky misused and abused phrases pop up to muddy the water.

What are these phrases you ask? They are commonly used expressions that are used incorrectly. Sometimes it's because words are slurred, and sometimes it's because the meanings are slurred. Either way, I've listed a few to help you understand the concept of misused and abused phrases.


Changing the Words

Because we tend to speak fast, and rarely articulately, some of the words and letters in a phrase are slurred together or left out entirely, which leads to substitute words being inserted, and voila! We are left with terms that literally make no sense, but are used constantly in our day to day lives.

Have you ever tried to sing a song you really love, but were unsure of the lyrics? You make up your own - or insert what you think are the correct words - and sing your heart out, regardless if it makes sense or not. That, my friends, is the definition of misused and abused phrases (also known as Mondegreen).

For example, the phrase "Could care less" is a common phrase that is used to convey indifference, but the exact meaning of the phrase specifies that there is a choice on whether to care or not, and the choice is not to. "Couldn't care less" is the correct phrase to use because this truly portrays indifference.

"For all intensive purposes" - This is a very popular phrase and is wrong in the sense that the speaker is talking only about the purposes and how intense said purposes are. The correct phrase is "All intents and purposes" which expresses something that is intended.

"Pass mustard" is another wonderful phrase that is used a lot and is totally wrong unless you want some mustard with your hot dog. The correct phrase is "Pass muster" which means to measure up to required standards.

And apparently many people have selective hearing when it comes to words that sound suspiciously like a specific body part:

"Nip it in the butt" is not correct, and never has been. The correct phrase when referring to stopping something before it gets out of hand is, "Nip it in the bud".

And then there is the ever popular "Butt load", which is used to express a large amount of something. The phrase should be "Boat load", which is more logical and much more polite.

Changing the Meaning

Of course, changing the words is not the only way to misuse or abuse a phrase. There are other examples that started out with a specific meaning, only to end up being used in the wrong sense.

"Begs the question" - This phrase is commonly used by everyone from presidents and senators to journalists and bloggers. It's generally used in reference to raising an important question about an important issue, but in fact it's not really meant to apply to an actual question at all.

Begsthequestion.info states:

"Begging the question" (BTQ) is a form of logical fallacy in which a statement or claim is assumed to be true without evidence other than the statement or claim itself.

In other words, "Begging the question" describes an argument in which the supposed premises are the same as the conclusion, so they don't actually offer any support. When we say that an argument "begs the question," we mean that the reasons offered in support of the idea are just the same as the idea itself, so they don't really offer any support at all.

Another way of describing an argument that begs the question is to say that it simply assumes what it is supposed to prove.

"Women can't be bullfighters, because only men can be bullfighters."

The intended premise - "only men can be bullfighters" - is equivalent in meaning to the conclusion "women can't be bullfighters." Premises are supposed to offer reasons to accept the conclusion - they can't simply restate it.

"Coin a phrase" - Most people use this as another way of saying, "to use an old phrase." But the true meaning is "to invent a new phrase."

Everyone uses the incorrect expressions, even scholars, because these phrases have wormed their way into our culture, used so often that we believe them to be correct. But when you look at each word in the phrase individually, there is something wrong. Just be aware that they're out there, ready and willing to move into your language arsenal, lock, stock and barrel.

And just for fun, this essay goes into great detail on other examples that surprised me with the various words and phrases we take for granted, but are in reality "misused and abused" words. One of my favorites?

My answer to the exclamatory “My, how time flies!” is to quote Austin Dobson’s The Paradox of Time: “Time goes you say? Ah no! Alas, Time stays, we go.”

I had never thought of it in those terms!

Comments

[snailbones.livejournal.com]

Butt load is a new one on me - I think I actually prefer it *g*

Fascinating stuff, thank you, and thanks also for the link to the essay.

[ariestess]

I've seen it changed to butt ton, too, which is what I tend to use when just yammering on. I'll use correct terminology when I'm writing or doing something formally, but if it's with friends? Nah... I get lazy then...

[snailbones.livejournal.com]

*g* I love it. I was just thinking about the first time one of the kids said they "couldn't be arsed" to do something, and in the end I had to get them to spell the "arsed" to me because it sounded like "couldn't be asked", and that just didn't make sense...

[ariestess]

*nods* That's one of those phrases that my 9yo nephew will use [in correct context, no less] as a way to test his cursing boundaries. And he's known since he was like 6-7yo what he can say in a variety of settings. He's allowed much more leniency around the immediate family [ie. his mom, and us aunties] than in school, with his grandparents/extended family, and in mixed public company.

[snailbones.livejournal.com]

And thank you again for the link to the essay; I finally had time to sit and read it this morning, and it had me giggling into my coffee.

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

Hee!! Me too!

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

Butt ton is a new one for me. I can see where that could go a different route as well when others hear button. I am with you though, I sometimes will say butt load when speaking too. As long as it doesn't sneak into my written works, I figure it's okay. :)

[ariestess]

LOL! I have used butt ton [or the equivalent of f*ck ton] in my writing, but not my formal/professional writing.

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

Hee! Butt load does have a certain connotation to it, doesn't it? :D

You're welcome and I'm glad you enjoyed that essay!

[haldoor.livejournal.com]

Thank you! These are interesting examples, most of which must be American, I think, as I've always used most of the correct terms, but I do know there are others that people (including me!) use around here that are wrong, and it's only when you look at them properly like this that you realise. I will check out the essay too!

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

You're welcome!

Yeah, I think these may be American examples, especially American slang. Sometimes it's ingrained in us to say what we hear, thinking that it's got to be right if others are saying it. I know I'm guilty of that especially when I say, "every once in awhile". I use that a lot!

Hope you enjoy that essay!

[sid]

I've always assumed when people say something like "Let's all try to think outside the box, to coin a phrase," that they're doing it deliberately, in a humorous way. Knowing that they're doing the opposite of what they're saying and knowing that their audience knows, too.

So either I've been giving people too much credit - or this is how the misuse began, with some members of such audiences not getting the joke!

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

You could be right. It's hard to tell how our words and phrases got started in the first place, sometimes it's best to not even worry about where they began. :D It's like playing telephone. The original message gets mangled by the end of the line. Still this was an interesting topic to research!

[mistress-tien.livejournal.com]

How about "towed the line" instead of "toed the line"? You are supposed to line up with your toes on the line; not drag along the line around.

[janedavitt.livejournal.com]

I thought that was from when they used to pull barges through a tunnel using a rope; literally towing the line? It makes sense both ways in different ways :-) I agree that in a following the rules sense 'toeing' seems better though.

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

I think this may be two different things, though I can see how it could be typed wrong. We have a whole section of homonyms in this community that try to help others avoid making those mistakes!

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

I've seen that before and you're right about the meaning! I wondered if maybe that person missed a typo. :)

A point of diction

[diebirchen.livejournal.com]

Actually, I think that for purposes of diction, I believe it would be, "Language has a funny way of ingratiating itself WITH[, not ON] us." Why? The only answer is "because." I went to New York BY train. Uh-huh. How about, I went to New York WITH train? Nope. Why not? Both are prepositions. Answer: because. Prepositions are one of the things that seem to trip up non-native speakers too. When I speak in German, I sometimes fail to pick the right one, but hey, not my mother tongue. I could, of course, be wrong on the "with not on" thing, but I think not.
FGoVU

Re: A point of diction

[lady-lirenel.livejournal.com]

And that's why it would be easier to have a language like Latin and just shove the verb into the ablative case and not worry about prepositions at all. =D

Re: A point of diction

[diebirchen.livejournal.com]

Oh, I so loathed Latin! About all I remember is the first line of Caesar's Gallic Wars. Weeeeell, there are some wonderful love poems by Catullus and Ovid, but I'd rather read 'em in English. I know all the reasons for studying Latin, but it wasn't for me. Even the College of Cardinals no longer expects its members to know the stuff. Give me a living language. My second language is German. The FGoVU stands for Fairy Godmother of Verbal Usage. The tiniest of errors, and I see/hear it. It's both a gift and a curse: the editorial ear that can't be turned off.
FGoVU

Re: A point of diction

[lady-lirenel.livejournal.com]

Ah, see, Latin introduced me to the classics to the point that I was a classics major in undergrad. Beautiful language, though extremely hard to translate at times. Of course, then I became enamored with dead languages: Latin in high school and college, Ancient Greek in college, and Old English senior year of undergrad. In fact, I took German in high school because it was as close to Old English as I could get at the time. =D

Though I loved German for itself, too. Eh, I just love languages. Wish I were better at them.

Re: A point of diction

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

You could be right. I keep trying it and "...ingratiating itself WITH us" just doesn't sound right no matter how many times I say it. I probably should have written "Language has a funny way of ingratiating itself upon us," which makes much more sense. Oh well. Thank you for pointing it out!! :)

[cyyt.livejournal.com]

I've never heard of 'for all intensive purposes' before!

Butt load... on the other hand... I didn't actually realise it meant boat load. I thought they were different!:X

Thanks for the tips!(:

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

I've heard it before, and even seen it in written communications on various forums. And I may have... well you know, might have -- when I was younger of course -- said it the wrong way. :) I only needed to hear the correct way of saying it once though.

I probably don't want to know what you thought butt load means, do I?? lol

You're welcome!!

[wivern.livejournal.com]

Oh my goodness, yes. 'Could care less' always baffles me, don't people think about what they are saying. *g*

Though considering 'cheap at half the price' I admit it's hard to know when a saying is meant as quirky.

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

I think you hit it on the head! People don't necessarily think about it because they hear it that way and think it's right. And no, slapping them upside the head is not acceptable. :D

"Cheap at half the price" is rather redundant isn't it? And yes, quirky in its own way.

[sosaith.livejournal.com]

I heard a justification for that one, actually. I could care less (but that would take effort I'm not willing to expend).

[wivern.livejournal.com]

Makes sense I guess.

For me the thing is, I grew up with it being 'I couldn't care less' which seems perfectly logical. So I never understood why a logical saying was changed to an illogical one. *g*

[elusive-life-77.livejournal.com]

What cracks me up is that 'butt-load' has evolved! Have you ever heard someone say or write 'metric ass-ton'? I've always assumed it was the evolution of 'butt-load.' *grins*

The word I always thought meant something else is 'bemused'. I always thought it meant something like "quietly amused" or "stunned amusement" but it actually means bewildered or confused. Now I see it all over and I have to wonder each time if its meant as amused or confused!

I kind of wish I hadn't learned what it really meant! I was happy in my ignorance! lol

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

I've never heard of 'metric ass-ton' but I'm sure I'll hear it sooner or later. :) We do tend to take "common" phrases and stretch them a little to help get the message across, don't we?

You know, now that you point it out, I think I've always thought of "bemused" as both definitions. I've seen it used to mean "stunned amusement" in some instances, and to mean "bewildered" in others. This is a perfect example of how one word can be taken out of context - not to mention pointing out my own ignorance. *g*

I'm glad I was able to bemuse amuse you!! :D

[moon-raven2.livejournal.com]

A lot of these have changed, I think, because people have stopped reading. They hear "for all intents and purposes," but they've never seen it written. They just say what they hear, and at some point write what they hear, and overall look ridiculous. :)

I read something very similar to this recently on Huffington Post, and it had never occurred to me to mangle some of these phrases that way. I think it's because I *do* read so much, and I've seen them written far more than I've heard them said.

[moon-raven2.livejournal.com]

So, um, not that this is exactly relevant, but I think it's sorta interesting. I read the essay linked above, and then I read another one of the same author's essays on the blog, and I came across this...

"The erroneous figure of the American population being 10% homosexual was perpetrated by Kinsey as a result of his interviewing a disproportionate number of homosexuals and other sexual deviants. The actual figure is between 1% and 2% as estimated by thorough and honest anthropologists - still far too many for comfort, but not as ridiculous as Kinsey and his acolytes would have it."

Wow. That's pretty, um, hateful. Like I said, not relevant to the topic at hand, but I don't think I'll be reading any more of this person's blog. :)

[ariestess]

*snorts* That's definitely hateful. Particularly because the author doesn't go on to show, following the sexual orientation continuum, that 1-2% of homosexuality has a "mirror" of 1-2% heterosexuality, with a 96% continuum of levels of bisexuality. Those percentages are for solely homo-/heterosexuality, with no deviations toward the opposite sex of their preference.

And no, I won't read any other essays by that person either.

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

OMG! I hadn't read anything else by that author, and like you, I don't want to read anything else he's written either! The linked essay is relevant though so I'll keep it there, just... *shakes head* I thought he seemed to be brilliant with that essay, but now I don't know.

Thanks for the heads up!!

[ariestess]

They just say what they hear

Which is also where we get such gems as would OF/could OF/should OF instead of would've/could've/should've. The worst of that? Would of had...

*facepalm*

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

Oh my gosh, "would OF/could OF/should OF" drives me nuts!! And it's also worse when it's written out. I've learned to deal (as calmly as I can) with the verbal versions, but the written ones makes me want to scream. :) Like I said, drives me nuts!

[Borrowing from the southern half of my family]
"Many's the time when I would of had to hurt someone when I saw that." :D

[ariestess]

*nods* It nearly kills me. I even saw it in a book I was reading once. Nearly died...

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

OMG In a book? A published book?? Hopefully it was part of someone's dialog... No, even then. Just no!

[ariestess]

Nope, not part of dialogue. It was in a proof copy I was reading. Not sure if it was found/corrected by anyone else tho'...

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

A lot of these have changed, I think, because people have stopped reading. They hear "for all intents and purposes," but they've never seen it written.

You do have a very good point there. and it's worse when they're corrected and they still say the same thing. That drives me crazy!!

[euphrosyne2u.livejournal.com]

One of my personal peeves... I worked with a person whose favorite expression was 'flushed out' Now that's evocative! I did try explaining to her that it was 'fleshed out' the intent of which is to expand on an idea or concept. However she never got it and instead preferred obviously to 'dispose' of the idea by flushing it away. Since most of her work related ideas stunk I guess this was okay!

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

Some people just don't get it! And we are then accused of being grammar snobs when we try to "gently" correct them - especially after the 2nd or 3rd time. :D But hey, there's always a bright side to everything. Hee! I like your attitude!

[xanthe.livejournal.com]

LOL! I loved your examples. What about "butt naked?" Because I see that written as "buck naked" sometimes whereas I'm more familiar with the first and wonder which is right.

[http://users.livejournal.com/traycer_/]

Hee! One of the other grammarians brought this up and I confessed that I use "butt naked" all the time! So I went and did some research and found out that both are correct to a certain extent. A few of the references I consulted disagreed, but for the most part, both "butt naked" and "buck naked" were phrases that have been around for a long time. Which is a good thing, I suppose. I like the first term better. :D

[xanthe.livejournal.com]

Thank you! LOL! I thought "buck naked" was wrong but it appears not!

[wanderingsmith.livejournal.com]

...I still don't quite understand the one about 'begs the question'. Would this not be acceptable?

A week after this accident, he outran a police officer, begging the question "How severe could the injuries from said accident have been".

[viridian.livejournal.com]

I always thought butt-load came from the crapload/shitload/assload line of rude words, and was a toned-down form of that. I never got the sense that it had the slightest bit to do with boat load, or, if it did, the change was deliberate in order to be rude.

In any case, I think it's pretty firmly entrenched as a slang term all its own, and I'd argue that it can, in fact, be used "correctly" if you're writing, say, a BTVS-type character who uses all kinds of made-up slang already.