You probably make a distinction between the phrases “wait on” and “wait for.” Usually, we think of “waiting on” as something to do with service: It took a while for the waiter to come over and wait on us. We waited for him for at least fifteen minutes. Yet sometimes this distinction is not made, and you might “wait on someone for fifteen minutes.” One might assume at first that the phrase “wait on” when most of us would say “wait for” is British English; that is what we generally do when something is not common for us. However, “wait on” instead of “wait for” is not actually British English at all and is reported to have started in the South. As such, it is not considered incorrect, and the distinction between the two may be disintegrating ( as are many other standards – much to my chagrin).
Here are some other peeves and oddities you have written to me about (not including ending a sentence with a preposition, as I just did):
Hopefully – People commonly use hopefully to mean I hope, which is not exactly right. Hopefully is an adverb.
- Hopefully, it doesn’t rain tomorrow. What you really mean is I hope it doesn’t rain tomorrow.
- She looked hopefully at the blue sky and wished for another nice day tomorrow. Correct use as an adverb.
Try and – The phrase try and is often used instead of the correct phrase try to.
- Please try to be on time tomorrow. (correct)
- Please try and be on time tomorrow. (incorrect)
Axed – Often asked turns into axed. Seems to be regional or just the way some people say it. And it is a common peeve. Axed is also easier to say than asked.
Baby Mama – I tend to agree with the person who found this expression weird. Although it means the mother of someone’s child, it doesn’t really say that, does it? Do we used Baby Daddy? Yeah, I guess we do.
Since/Because – One reader wrote to me about the difference between since and because. Since is often used when some think because would be more appropriate. Since is a preposition indicating time. Because is a subordinating conjunction indicating effect. However, since is also a subordinating conjunction and can be, in that case, synonymous with because.
- I have been tired since last night. (preposition indicating time)
- Because it is so late, I am not going out. (subordinating conjunction indicating cause/effect)
- Since it is so late, I am not going out. (technically also correct, although you can use because, and many would prefer to keep that distinction between since and because.)
Supposably – Not a word. The correct word is supposedly, although supposably rolls off the tongue a little more easily.
Funnest – Oh, come on. Not a word. Yes, even television news people say it, but I am thinking they are “joking.” Something is more fun (not funner) or the most fun (funnest). Funner and funnest are not words. There are certain words whose comparatives and superlatives are not made by adding -er and -est, but by adding more and most before then. Take beautiful. You are more beautiful, not beautifuler. You are more correct, not correcter.
Trite Words – Some people are bothered by trite words — those words that are overused and thrown into sentences to take the place of the former fillers like um and uh. One of the most popular is so, which can be used at the beginning or end of a sentence — for no reason.
- So, I think I will be going now.
- I am leaving now, so . . .
Other trite and overused words include awesome, totally, and of course — like.
Oftentimes – Often (with a silent t please) will do just fine. Often means “many times,” so oftentimes means “many times times.” Redundant.
They/Their – Half of us have always used the singular they. The other half of us deplore it. I am waiting for the powers that be to come up with a singular gender-neutral pronoun. We have it, but we cannot use than one for people. I continue to use they as a singular only, and if it becomes too cumbersome to do so, I rewrite.
- Either John or Andy will bring his guitar.
- Either Judy or Alice will bring her guitar.
- Either John or Alice will bring their guitar. (singular they)
- Either John or Alice will bring his or her guitar. (blech)
- Either John or Alice will bring a guitar. (simple avoidance)
Stay tuned next week as we tackle I and me (and the other pronouns) once and for all. (?)
I agree on a lot of your points. But remember, if English had not continually evolved we would all be speaking some form of Proto-Indo-European. There are many words and phrases that are accepted today that would have sent grammarians into a fit just 150-200 years ago. The reverse is also true. Read Chaucer or Shakespeare or some of the writers into the 18th century and analyze the grammar they used (not necessarily the words they use). You’ll see double (or triple) negatives, the singular ‘they’ (in common use prior to the 18th century, so we already have a singular gender-neutral pronoun), verb conjugations, and so on and so on. Many of our peeves today will be completely acceptable in a couple of generations.
Be happy that the English language is allowed to evolve and we don’t have an equivalent of the Académie française passing judgment on all things English.
Above all, remember that there is no such thing as “English.” There are a lot of varieties, many of which are as valid as the others. There are even different forms for academic and informal writing.
Thanks for the comment. I do realize that our language evolves. I does seem that the vocabulary evolves more than the grammatical structure though. As a grammarian, of course I prefer standards, since it keeps me employed. However, as a writer being edited, I realize that sometimes the effect of something is ruined by sticking too closely to “rules.” For academic or business writing, I still say, stick to accepted standards.
Having lived in Nashville for 2 years in the early 70s, I became accustomed to hearing “waiting on him for 15 minutes.” Actually it became kind of charming to my New England born and bred ears.
What bugs me today is the combination of the word “on” with the word “love”–as in “love on them” or” loving on them”. Why not just love?
I think I have heard that one. While, “I am putting some love on you,” might make sense in an idiomatic way, “I’m loving on you,” doesn’t.
Your knowledge of grammar coupled with your sense of wit makes pondering your conundrums fun. Some of that fun dissipates due to spelling mistakes. I blame half of the problem on auto-correct and the other half on you or whoever proofreads for you. I would be happy to proofread for you.
I apologize. I proofread my posts, and I don’t proofread them well enough many times. This past week I was late writing my post, having just returned from vacation. I was tired and I know that is no excuse!
It is amazing how terribly wrong people get when they speak in English. The examples you gave should never have happened in an English speaking country. That said, I am from India which has an enormous English speaking population. Yrt, we have our idiosyncrasies too. You often hear a doctor instruct his patient to ‘Take one tablet every after three hours.’
I agree with you! I think people whose native language is English should have a good command of the language. Thanks for the comment.
I’m so with you — it is like fingernails on a a chalkboard!
I know one that you will totally agree with, as you aren’t a big fan of our President….
Bigly
Keep up your fun columns.
Thanks, Carol! Bigly! Argh!!!!! I am not sure if he is saying bigly or big league, but I don’t like it anyway!
I had a dream where a reporter asked the Donald if he thought sharing classified information with Russian diplomats should be considered an impeachable act. The Donald looked down at the reporter, smiled and answered the reporter…in Russian.
Ha! Weird dream. He can’t even speak English!