Posted: 20 April 2007 04:08 AM   [ Ignore ]
Total Posts:  1549
Joined  2007-01-29

One or two have just been mentioned in other threads, and here they are:

The pancreas for all our problems.
A process that I did not have transparency into.

Any more?  (I just love pointing out stupidity in people who are much cleverer/more successful/richer/more beautiful/more interesting/more popular than me.) And if you’re wondering what educational value there is to this thread, please let me know if you find out.

Actually, I’m feeling guilty now I’ve said all that, so I’ll relate the whole thread to the word “gloat”, which is what it really amounts to.  From the online OED:

[Of obscure origin, but apparently = MHG. and mod.G. glotzen to stare, Sw. (dial.) glotta to peep, ON. glotta to grin. Prob. taken up in the 16th c. from some dialect, in which it may have been an adoption from ON.
Although common in the 17th and 18th c., the word is not in Phillips and was unknown to Johnson, who quotes the lines from Rowe (see 2 below) with the remark, ‘This word I conceive to be ignorantly written for gloar’.

Posted: 20 April 2007 06:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Total Posts:  5962
Joined  2007-01-03

While it’s not linguistic in nature, another howler I saw in a newspaper some 18 years ago (alas, I’ve lost the clipping) was:

“A government official, who wished to remain anonymous, would not comment on the matter.”

The only possible value I see in this statement is if layout needed another half-column-inch.

‹‹ Whence "wellness" ?      Lo and Behold ››