Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Expressions people get wrong
Comments
-
People mixing up generally and genuinely really gets to me.2
-
People who say literally when they mean anything other than literally.
E.g. it was so funny I literally exploded.6 -
I literally hate this.Fiiish said:People who say literally when they mean anything other than literally.
E.g. it was so funny I literally exploded.6 -
'I can't hardly see'.0
-
A colleague once asked "how many cigarettes are in a ten pack?"
Wonderful woman, just not the brightest spark.0 -
That’s nice!............Mrs Brown.Covered End said:"What do they think we slapped all the way over to Belgium for if not to have our voice heard ? "
Either everyone was slapping each other like Reeves and Mortimer or it should be schlepped.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/schlep
0 -
Is it ironic or ironical.....you choose?0
-
Are instead of our (or vice versa)
His instead of he's (or vice versa)
Somethink
Nothink
Aksed instead of asked
2 -
You are right that I am inferring a temporal relationship that isn't actually stated. However that inference is one that we make all the time. If I was to tell you that, "Holmes crossed into the box and Magennis scored". After you'd picked yourself up from the floor, your understanding would be that Magennis scored directly from Holmes' cross. You wouldn't need 'then' to understand it. You would know that I wouldn't be telling you about the cross if it didn't lead to the goal. 'You can't eat your cake and have it' is clear in it's meaning that once eaten your cake no longer exists. Whilst I concede that 'You can't have your cake and and eat it' could mean the same thing, it is ambiguous in that it suggests the possibility of some force stopping you from consuming a cake that you possess.AddicksAddict said:
No, as I said, the two mean the same thing. There is no mention of time, of one coming after the other. If you have you cake, you haven't eaten it. If you've eaten your cake, you don't have it. If it said "You can't have your cake and THEN eat it", I'd agree with you, that doesn't make sense but you're inferring a temporal relationship that isn't stated.Stig said:
Like you, I'd never heard the original version. I only discovered it when I looked up the 'have your cake and eat it' version one day because it is senseless: If you 'have your cake', i.e. you possess a cake, you can eat it. Other than bakers and supermarkets, there would be absolutely no point in anyone ever having a cake if they couldn't eat it. The unused original phrase makes perfect sense though; the very process of eating your cake destroys it. Once eaten it no longer exists. Two very different phrases. Unfortunately the meaningful one has become defunct.AddicksAddict said:
It was always the former in our family, never heard the latter until this thread. However, each is OK because AND is commutative so both expressions mean exactly the same thing. "You can either have your cake or you can eat it" also means the same as long as you accept the OR is exclusive not inclusive.Stig said:
Another modern derivation that doesn't make any sense is, 'you can't have your cake and eat it'. I should be, 'you can't eat your cake and have it'.SuedeAdidas said:The proof is in the pudding.
I don't get how this derivation of the saying has come about......because it doesn’t make any sense.1 - Sponsored links:
-
‘Edge your bets’ instead of ‘hedge your bets’
‘Very unique’. No, it’s very rare, or very unusual, or it is unique. There is no sliding scale, something is either unique or it isn’t.3 -
I used to say 'self defecating humor' until I was gently corrected by one of the natives...3
-
Was it Mark Lawrenson that said a cup draw for a big team was a potential potato skin.6
-
-
If you told me Holmes crossed and Magennis scored, you're right, I'd have to pick myself off the floor. However, I'd be inferring a relationship between the two acts that you haven't explicitly stated. It could have been that Holmes crossed in the first minute and Magennis scored in the 90th minute and the two acts had nothing to do with each other. Of course, it would probably be perfectly reasonable for me to make that inference because of the context in which we were having the conversation.Stig said:
You are right that I am inferring a temporal relationship that isn't actually stated. However that inference is one that we make all the time. If I was to tell you that, "Holmes crossed into the box and Magennis scored". After you'd picked yourself up from the floor, your understanding would be that Magennis scored directly from Holmes' cross. You wouldn't need 'then' to understand it. You would know that I wouldn't be telling you about the cross if it didn't lead to the goal. 'You can't eat your cake and have it' is clear in it's meaning that once eaten your cake no longer exists. Whilst I concede that 'You can't have your cake and and eat it' could mean the same thing, it is ambiguous in that it suggests the possibility of some force stopping you from consuming a cake that you possess.AddicksAddict said:
No, as I said, the two mean the same thing. There is no mention of time, of one coming after the other. If you have you cake, you haven't eaten it. If you've eaten your cake, you don't have it. If it said "You can't have your cake and THEN eat it", I'd agree with you, that doesn't make sense but you're inferring a temporal relationship that isn't stated.Stig said:
Like you, I'd never heard the original version. I only discovered it when I looked up the 'have your cake and eat it' version one day because it is senseless: If you 'have your cake', i.e. you possess a cake, you can eat it. Other than bakers and supermarkets, there would be absolutely no point in anyone ever having a cake if they couldn't eat it. The unused original phrase makes perfect sense though; the very process of eating your cake destroys it. Once eaten it no longer exists. Two very different phrases. Unfortunately the meaningful one has become defunct.AddicksAddict said:
It was always the former in our family, never heard the latter until this thread. However, each is OK because AND is commutative so both expressions mean exactly the same thing. "You can either have your cake or you can eat it" also means the same as long as you accept the OR is exclusive not inclusive.Stig said:
Another modern derivation that doesn't make any sense is, 'you can't have your cake and eat it'. I should be, 'you can't eat your cake and have it'.SuedeAdidas said:The proof is in the pudding.
I don't get how this derivation of the saying has come about......because it doesn’t make any sense.
However, in the matter of the possession and consumption of the cake, I've always taken it as two statements about the state of the cake and to mean the two states are mutually exclusive. Having said that, the eat / have order is, as you say, unambiguous.
2 -
Mondee instead of Monday0
-
Laura Norder0
-
Cause of link.
Nope you mean causal link.0 -
Breggsit. Nope you mean brexit.0
-
Used to work with a guy who would say guitar instead of catarr.
"I can't come in today, I've got a sore throat and guitar."1 - Sponsored links:
-
Corrected the Wife-to-be for this at 4am this morning when she said I should of made the babies bottle last night.McBobbin said:Could of, should of... These are the basics people!
I simply responded 'Yes I should HAVE'
Her reply was something along the lines of 'F*** off you d***.'11 -
bosses wife - venezuelan, i asked her the other day if she knew if such and such had paid and she went " it doesn't ring my bells"1
-
I hate it when people put their heroes on Peddle Stools...0
-
Anything 'coming to tuition' is one of my favourites.
3 -
I agree. But unfortunately the meaning of literally has now changed, and to say 'I literally exploded' is ok apparently in an informal context.Fiiish said:People who say literally when they mean anything other than literally.
E.g. it was so funny I literally exploded.
Informal: 'used for emphasis while not being literally true.'
This literally makes my blood boil.
0 -
People who say borrow instead of lend, as in "Can you borrow me a fiver?"
And @JamesSeed is right, the dictionary literally says "Literally: not literally". I guess it makes sense in a bad == good in 80s style type of things, but it is a little crazy.0 -
Died in the wool rather than dyed in the wool rears its ugly head every now and again.0
-
I'm going to get an expresso coffee.... can only assume they mean one that's served very quickly...5
-
Bloke at work was always using the expression he or she "Turned round and said----".
I wondered if everyone he knew faced away from him before turning round to speak.
But then he was an obnoxious twat.
Or should that be an obnouxshas twat!!1 -
I once received a card with 'Were getting married' on it. I wasn't sure if they'd forgotten the apostrophe or called the whole thing off.14
