|   IRREGARDLESS IS NOT A WORD!!!(nm) | Dutchy
Feb 24, 2003 2:37 PM | | |
| sure it is | terry b
Feb 24, 2003 2:41 PM | | not a good one, but it is a word.
Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
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. |
| Nope | jtolleson
Feb 24, 2003 3:04 PM | | that's the confusion between descriptive and prescriptive dictionaries. Some descriptive dictionaries will have "ain't" in them also, but it doesn't make it proper English. Perhaps the phrase shouldn't be "is it a word" but "is it a REAL word" or "is it grammatically correct."
It will still get you dinged on a graded paper (as it should) so calling it a word or finding it in a descriptive dictionary doesn't really change anything.
There's a great story about Justice Rehnquist stopping a lawyer in the middle of oral argument at the Supreme Court to tell him that "irregardless" is not a word. I may not love Rehnquist but I would have cheered for him at that moment. |
| similar thing happened to me | DougSloan
Feb 24, 2003 3:09 PM | | It wasn't Justice Rehnquist, but a county judge in Platte County, Missouri. It was my first time ever in front of a judge, right after passing the bar.
I got 10 seconds into my argument, and the crotchety old judge stopped me and said, "Mr. Sloan, 'ok' is not a word, and you will never use it in my courtroom again." If I wasn't nervous before, I sure was then. My boss sat there and had to bite is fist not to laugh.
Doug |
| similar thing happened to me | FTMD
Feb 24, 2003 4:27 PM | | I was in a heated phone call with an older attorney who, at the time, intimidated me somewhat. I used the word 'irregardless' trying to make a point. He stopped me mid-sentence and said, in the most demeaning tone, "son, there is no such word as irregardless."
Lesson learned. Never used the word again. |
| That's the good thing about being a judge | KeeponTrekkin
Feb 24, 2003 6:23 PM | | You get instant compliance from big egos - somewhat different from the experience on this board.
KoT |
| "Yutes" isn't a word either | js5280
Feb 24, 2003 6:31 PM | | I learned that at the movies. As in "These two yutes. . ." |
| I thought that was spelled "utes" ??? :) nm | noveread
Feb 25, 2003 7:05 AM | | |
| Trouble is "Utes" is a word. . . | js5280
Feb 25, 2003 7:37 AM | | Ute is a Native American tribe in the Utah/Colorado area. It's a silent "y" ;-) |
| As long as you don't say "those two utes" while in brooklyn (nm) | ColnagoFE
Feb 25, 2003 7:53 AM | | |
| missed your chance Doug | bigrider
Feb 25, 2003 5:15 AM | | You should have replied
OK Your Honor |
| I disagree | laffeaux
Feb 24, 2003 3:38 PM | | What makes a word a word? Does it go before the the English review board? No, if it's used by people it's a word.
Ever said, "that's cool?" I don't think the review board would like it, but everyone says it.
Maybe some words are indication of education levels, regional up bringing, or culture, but if they communicate ideas and are understood, are they not words?
Pop - means soda in much of the US
Grinder - means sandwich in New England
Are those not words either? |
| Yo, wak, G, and nm | hycobob
Feb 24, 2003 5:47 PM | | are all fine examples of a generation gone to hell |
| Yes. I love grinders | Kristin
Feb 25, 2003 6:46 AM | | But you should see the expression on the face of a midwesterner when you ask if they would like one. Then I enjoy my grinder with a tasty soda. |
| I order one just to see what it was | laffeaux
Feb 25, 2003 11:49 AM | | I lived in Hartford for a short time. In the yellow pages, every listing delivered pizza and grinders. I ordered one just to see what it was. I was disappointed that it was just a "hoagie." |
| Oh, gee | terry b
Feb 24, 2003 5:34 PM | | Have you called Merriam-Webster to inform them of their gaffe? |
| Irregardless, we like say it here in the USA | Kristin
Feb 24, 2003 2:41 PM | | [Probably blend of irrespective, and regardless.]
Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so. |
| Have I wandered into the linguistics board? :-) (nm) | TREKY
Feb 24, 2003 2:48 PM | | |
| good stuff | ishmael
Feb 24, 2003 3:20 PM | | I've picked the phrase "these ones" from my family. I think it's a European thing, anyone heard it before. Do you pronounce the D in Wednesday. Cant think of any other goofy linguistic questions at the moment. I'll surely come back with some. |
| My favorite... reoccur(nm) | dave_w
Feb 24, 2003 3:18 PM | | |
| what's weird about that? nm | ishmael
Feb 24, 2003 3:20 PM | | |
| From a purely scientific standpoint, things only occur once. nm | Kristin
Feb 24, 2003 3:30 PM | | |
| it's "recur" (nm) | laffeaux
Feb 24, 2003 3:31 PM | | |
| My list | Spoiler
Feb 24, 2003 4:22 PM | | lifeless corpse, meaningless gibberish, mutual cooperation,
new record, old adage, organic life, original founder, patently obvious, personal friend, personal opinion, sworn affidavit, true facts, ultimat outcome, violent explosion
agricultural crops, close proximity, complete monopoly,
completely full, end result, entirely absent, future plan, general public, hired mercenary,
and of course: first annual |
| don't forget the redundant acronyms | bludoggy
Feb 24, 2003 4:59 PM | | ATM Machine, PIN Number, HIV Virus, TCBY Yogurt... |
| IRREGARDLESS: | benja15
Feb 24, 2003 3:39 PM | | irregardless
adv : in spite of everything; without regard to drawbacks; "he
carried on regardless of the difficulties" [syn: regardless,
irrespective, disregardless, no matter, disregarding] |
| this is "SO FUN" nm | Bike Nut
Feb 24, 2003 3:56 PM | | |
| What could be funner?nm | ACE-
Feb 24, 2003 6:09 PM | | nm |
| NICE!!! (nm) | bludoggy
Feb 25, 2003 6:34 AM | | |
| Can we add this to the FAQ/FDQ list??? (nm) | PODIUMBOUNDdotCA
Feb 24, 2003 4:09 PM | | |
| re: IRREGARDLESS IS NOT A WORD!!!(nm) | mapei boy
Feb 24, 2003 4:22 PM | | Hey, Ken of Fresno! Where are ya' when we need ya? Show your colors! Give those prescriptivists what for! Stand up for "irregardless," irregardless of your personal opinion of the term. |
| My girlfriend is an Editor at a major book house | Lazywriter
Feb 24, 2003 5:08 PM | | in New York City and irregardless IS A WORD. Merriam Webster and Oxford English dictionaries are the standard of the profession and all other dictionaries are considered jokes. Irregardless is a bastardization, but it is nonetheless a word. So, for all you people who think you are right and come off as pretentious when you "correct" others, YOU ARE INCORRECT. |
| My girlfriend IS Merriam Webster and I'd NEVER cheat on her! | serbski
Feb 24, 2003 6:48 PM | | |
| LOL!!! Hey Lazy are you trying to tell us that you value... | wasabekid
Feb 24, 2003 7:00 PM | | the opinion of your Girlfriend?
I thought women are just people to show your NUT's to. So, do I take it to mean that once you make it "big time", at a minimum she doesn't stand a chance on becoming "Mrs. Lazywriter" and at worst she would quickly become ex-girlfriend?
'Just thought I'd ask.
W. |
| I could care less. (NOT!!!!!!!!!) | Kerry
Feb 24, 2003 5:09 PM | | Just because people constantly misuse the language, does not make it real. As in "I could care less" when in fact "I couldn't care less." If you "could care less" then the obvious question must be "How much less could you care?"
While working with engineers all my life has left me skeptical about people's ability to properly use the language, the Internet has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that spelling and grammar (or is it grammer?) is not a strong suit for many. |
| Dude, that's sarcasm | Kristin
Feb 25, 2003 6:53 AM | | When someone says, "I could care less," they are using sarcasm. It works for me. Too many type A's on this board. |
| Type A's on this board? You must be joking! nm | noveread
Feb 25, 2003 7:09 AM | | |
| Leave me alone (nm) | irregardless
Feb 24, 2003 5:13 PM | | . |
| DEFINALITY IS NOT A WORD | MGS
Feb 24, 2003 6:32 PM | | A combination of the terms possibility and definitely.
Definition:
If an item is both possible and definite, it may be a definality.
Usage:
Irregardless of the chances of winning the race, Lance new that coming home a winner was a definality. |
| Merriam Webster definition you morons!!!! | Lazywriter
Feb 24, 2003 7:54 PM | | Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
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. |
| Lighten Up Francis! (nm) | serbski
Feb 24, 2003 7:59 PM | | |
| That's right, it's a word but NOT recommended for USE!!! Like... | wasabekid
Feb 24, 2003 9:01 PM | | Main Entry: YO'MAMA
Pronunciation: "YO'-mom-ma
Function: verb
Etymology: probably an ebonic blend F*%k u and momma
Date: circa 1960
nonstandard : M@+#$*R F@^%K&R
usage of yo'mama originated in dialectal American ebonic speech in the late 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of uneducated lowlifes most commonly found in ghettos and white trash trailer parks. It is still commonly used primarily in speech, lately by delinquent juviniles to somehow evoke 'superiority' over another. It is still a long way from general acceptance by the educated majority. Use M@+#$*R F@^%K&R instead.
Cheers,
W. |
| Doesn't make it grammatically correct | jtolleson
Feb 25, 2003 8:01 AM | | and take a chill pill. It isn't personal (oh, I forgot. Everything to you is personal).
It'll still get you dinged on an English paper, notwithstanding that it shows up in descriptive dictionaries as a word labeled "nonstandard." http://englishplus.com/news/news1100.htm
"Ain't" gets the same treatment. http://www.bartleby.com/61/63/A0156300.html
Merriam-Webster is not a prescriptive dictionary. It includes grammatically incorrect words that are in common usage. http://www.inu.org/bieyi/cruises/webster.htm
You may choose to disagree but watch your blood pressure. |
| Splitting hairs | terry b
Feb 25, 2003 8:37 AM | | The original, simply worded post claimed "it is not a word." It doesn't matter if the dictionary is prescriptive or not, among other things dictionaries contain words and it's in a dictionary. Granted it's poor grammar and of course you look like a dunce if you use it, but that wasn't what started this silly thread. Saying that it's not a word because of the nature of the dictionary is a silly argument. |
| Actually | jtolleson
Feb 25, 2003 9:18 AM | | I felt like it restored substance over form to consider whether it was a "proper" word vs. whether it was merely a "used" word. Otherwise, the entire thread would be meaningless.
The silly thread was actually inspired by an earlier thread in which the word was used in jest. |
| just so.. | dotkaye
Feb 25, 2003 11:32 AM | | thank you for a little clarity. It is a word, yes: but not a good one. Actually it's a good indicator word, in much the same way as bad grammar, punctuation or spelling are - indicates that the writer is either unable or unwilling to think clearly.
see http://www.resort.com/~prime8/Orwell/patee.html |
| IRREGARDLESS WAS USED IN THE STONE AGE........ | MR_GRUMPY
Feb 24, 2003 6:53 PM | | It may not be a great word, but it's been in usage for a very long time. I pulled out my old Webster's unabridged that is so old that it is written on stone tablets (1962), and yup, it was right there. |
| 1962 was the stone age? | _rt_
Feb 25, 2003 7:02 AM | | irregardless of whether irregardless is a proper form of the word regardless, 1962 probably wasn't the stone age.....nevertheless given that the word irregardless was written in stone it must be a word.
based on the properties of the double negative (i.e., two negatives make a positive) irregardless = regardful
rt - regardful & impressed by everyone's ability to spout BS |
| 1960 was the Flintstones - the "modern stone-age family" | teamsloppy
Feb 25, 2003 8:50 PM | | The "modern stone-age family" (Fred and Wilma and later Pebbles Flintstone) and their friends and neighbors (Barney and Betty and later Bamm-Bamm Rubble) debuted on ABC in 1960.
http://www.toonopedia.com/flintstn.htm |
| yup: it's improper use of DISIRREGARDLESS (nm) | PdxMark
Feb 24, 2003 6:59 PM | | |
| UNDISIRREGARDLESS (nm) | Frith
Feb 24, 2003 8:29 PM | | |
| NONUNDISIRREGARDLESS! (nm) | rwbadley
Feb 24, 2003 8:39 PM | | |
| Please DISIRREGARD my last post (nm) | serbski
Feb 24, 2003 9:42 PM | | |
| double dis, double ir, regard double not less my post (nm) | teamsloppy
Feb 24, 2003 10:16 PM | | |
| I didn't mean not to say what it sounds like. | teamsloppy
Feb 24, 2003 10:45 PM | | I think I said that wrong: I didn't mean not to say what it sounds like. I meant to say that it's not right to not say that. I admit it's just not right to say that its not right to not say that that is not a word or that it's not right to say that it is not.
What I really meant to say is double non, DOUBLE UN, double dis, double ir , regardless. |
| ..your all idiots! ;-) nm | Spunout
Feb 25, 2003 5:27 AM | | |
| Fuggedaboudit!!!(nm) | Alexx
Feb 25, 2003 6:02 AM | | |
| re: check the dictionary | cyclopathic
Feb 25, 2003 6:04 AM | | irregardless
adv : in spite of everything; without regard to drawbacks; "he carried on regardless of the difficulties" [syn: regardless, irrespective, disregardless, no matter, disregarding]
Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University |
| Maybe not, but that's a whole nuther thing. (nm) | 128
Feb 25, 2003 7:33 AM | | |
| Can I make a whole nuther using two halves? (nm) | bigskulls
Feb 25, 2003 10:30 AM | | |
| You need two "halfs" to make a whole "nuther" (nm). | teamsloppy
Feb 25, 2003 10:40 AM | | |
| I think all of you have been snowed in for too long...(nm) | scary slow
Feb 25, 2003 10:37 AM | | |
| If you axe me nice I'll go to the liberry and look it up. (nm) | Turtleherder
Feb 25, 2003 11:54 AM | | |
| You'll find it | Tarball
Feb 25, 2003 1:51 PM | | I bet you can find something there, at. |
| At this point can I bring up "NUCULER", like our prez. says... | serbski
Feb 25, 2003 6:38 PM | | |
| |
