Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

A quote from a story on ESPN:

"Whether or not the property belonged to Mr. Simpson or not is still in debate," Lt. Clint Nichols said Sunday. "Having said that, the manner in which this property was taken, we have a responsibility to look into that, irregardless of who the property belonged to."

Yes/No?

Merriam Websters says and I quote
"Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
nonstandard : REGARDLESS
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word.
" There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead. " So from what I am reading there is a word sort of but it isnt used much and you probably should not use it...am I correct??
and I wont even comment on whose junk it was and who did what...

"Irregardless" is not the only example of poor prose there, but this is a quote, and speaking to a pile of microphones is seldom as smooth as writing. In writing, you can review what you've just done and are likely to spot the redundant "or not" and correct the poor structure of the second sentence.

He's also got a couple of "thats" going in different directions!

Here are a few language peeves from your humble Sharkboy. I make allowances for persons whose first language may not be English and/or whose minds have already been crushed by overexposure to the tubes of the interweb. I also cut myself a little slack, as English is my second language, even though I lack a first one.

When in print these things make me want to take a dremel tool to my eyeballs (hmm, maybe i could sell them as Fender Relics) or when spoken, jam a javelin (maybe even an AMC Javelin) into my ears.

1. "Irregardless"- I don't care if it has made it into the dictionary. I always want to say, "you mean, without no regard?" (It has been pointed out to me that most people would nod to that, taking that line of question as meaning exactly the same thing as "regardless" as well.)
2. Using "infer" when meaning "imply"
3. Using "mistrust" when meaning "distrust"
4. "Excellant"- I had never seen anybody misspell this word this way until ebay, and now it seems like this is how it is spelled half of the time on the internet(s).
5. "Definately" is definitely incorrect.
6. "Nukular"

How about "Burgandy", Mark? Irks the heck out of me.......

I think some combine "irrespective" with "regardless" just to be sure they get their meaning across.

I think we've got the beginning of a grammar/usage pet peeves thread here, irrespective and irregardless of what anyone else might or might not be thinking or intending.

A dictionary is a collection of words that are in use. Lots of those words are malaprops.

Those two words, especially, are used by people who think they are being eloquent and authoritative.

The issue of having a bunch of microphones in front of you is an interesting one. Shouldn't someone, given the task of communicating with the public, even for a sound bite's worth, at least have some public speaking experience under his/her belt? Or shouldn't he or she be comfortable with brief speechifying?

Since our first-grader-in-chief (and his father) have made us an international laughing stock with their mangled English, this bad usage has become more acceptable.

Here's another one: Has anyone noticed the proliferation of the pronunciation "ay" for the article "a"? Formerly used only for emphasis, it's passed into overuse, largely because of the Uniter's overuse of it in order to convince us he can speak authoritatively.

This also applies (perhaps more so) to the use of "the" pronounced "thee". In grammar, way back in the Dark Ages, we were taught that this is to be used before any word beginning with a vowel, to smooth the spoken transition between the two words, as in, "A Night at The Opera". Pronounce it as "thee", and it flows quite naturally. But pronounce it as "thuh", and you sound like a dolt.

Now, the "thee" pronunciation is in hyperuse, again, I suppose, because it sounds authoritative to the Unwashed Masses. Or so they think (politicians and newsreaders).

While we're on the topic of authoritative vocal quirks, has anyone noticed that often when Dr. Bush makes a speech (especially one in which key words are "war", "aggression", national security", and the like), he often emphasizes and extends his "S" sounds, to ssssound more "in command" of self, language, and country?

I had another paragraph here, but it was getting into politics and alcohol and how they shouldn't (but often do) mix, so I deleted it...

Don't get me started on Brokaw. Harry Shearer used to do a hilariously spot-on Brokaw impression.

I was talking to a teacher a few years ago, and lamenting the use of uh, umm, and ah by the talking heads on TV. He informed me they now have a term for the very thing we were told NEVER to use. It is called a vocalized pause!

I do have a few issues with your characterization of Bush being a dolt. Poor public speaker, yes. Dolt, no. Where does that leave Kerry, who everyone assured us was "uber" intelligent, as Bush had a better GPA? I think there is more to the "easy target" angle, than the actual facts. Nuff fer politics.

Have a nice day!

What do I know? I live in a predominantly French environment and, according to some, the French don't even have a word for "entrepreneur" (pronounced by the same some as "aunterpenoor").

What is this irrespectable?

...Dean

Ummm. Where do you get that I called Bush a dolt? I said,

"This also applies (perhaps more so) to the use of "the" pronounced "thee". In grammar, way back in the Dark Ages, we were taught that this is to be used before any word beginning with a vowel, to smooth the spoken transition between the two words, as in, "A Night at The Opera". Pronounce it as "thee", and it flows quite naturally. But pronounce it as "thuh", and you sound like a dolt."

No reference to Bush in that paragraph. Besides, he always pronounces it as "thee".

Not a Kerry fan here, either.

Sorry, I took "our first-grader-in-chief" to mean dolt. My bad. {:^)

Easy now, that dolt has thousands of nucular weapons under his control!

The funny thing about Shearer's Brokaw is that it sounds almost exactly like him. Brokaw's problem is that he can't quite form the letter "L"- it has to be made out of a "UY" combination. A good friend of mine has a similar issue. Wrap your mind around TB trying (or Harry Shearer's version of him saying): "Larry the llama left his life in Lilliput for the luxury of the lakes with Gina Lollobrigida."

I will say that "thuh" is correctly used when referring to "internets", "intertubes" and "interweb".

You sure you don't mean, "innernet"?

The issue with Brokaw is obviously a minor speech impediment (or do we have a newer, politically-corrector (sic) term for this?). Ironic, considering that he was one of the most "trusted", highly-salaried newsreaders on the planet...

There is an NPR (or should that be "AY NPR"?)reporter who has Brokovia, too. I find myself wondering, as I listen to him, whether it's congenital or idolatric.

"Irregardless" never fails to annoy me.

On the other hand, foot, side or what-have-you, language is an evolving form of communication. English changes so rapidly that it is difficult to understand what people were talking about a few hundred years ago. It's more of a fluid process than a Done Thing, and writers and poets and dolts and Presidents (think Warren Harding who brought the non-word "normalcy" into the lexicon) all play a role in changing and introducing words and usage. Applying firm rules to the English language is a lot like nailing jelly to a tree.